AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

JOHN AUGUST, Appellant, v. NEW YORK CENTRAL MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

MEMORANDUM

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed with costs.

Plaintiff suffered personal injuries when his vehicle collided with a vehicle owned and operated by Susan Schwarz. In addition to pursuing compensation under the Liberty Mutual Insurance policy Susan Schwarz had purchased to cover her vehicle, plaintiff sought compensation under a policy Susan's husband, Robert Schwarz, acquired from defendant New York Central Mutual Fire Insurance Company which designated a vehicle he owned as the "covered auto." Central Mutual timely disclaimed coverage on the ground that the accident fell within an exclusion in the policy. Plaintiff commenced this declaratory judgment action seeking a determination that Central Mutual was obligated under the policy issued to Robert Schwarz to extend liability coverage to Susan Schwarz on this personal injury claim. Supreme Court granted this relief but the Appellate Division reversed and declared that Central Mutual had properly disclaimed coverage. We agree.

Central Mutual's disclaimer is based on a policy provision excluding liability coverage for the ownership, maintenance or use of any vehicle, other than the designated covered auto, which is owned by "you" or "furnished or available for your regular use." Elsewhere in the policy, the terms "you" and "your" are defined to include the named insured — in this case, Robert Schwarz — and the spouse of the named insured if the spouse is a resident of the same household. This case falls squarely within the policy exclusion because Susan Schwarz resided with her husband, thereby meeting the policy's definition of "you," and she was operating a vehicle she owned which was not designated in the policy as a covered auto (see Jerge v. Buettner, 90 N.Y.2d 950, revg on dissent 225 A.D.2d 294 [4th Dept 1996]).

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum. Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Smith, Levine, Ciparick, Wesley, Rosenblatt and Graffeo concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

AUGUST v. NEW YORK CENTRAL MUTUAL FIRE INS. CO
(Apr 30, 2002)