AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
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
Attorney(S)
Judges

MICHAEL SCHATZ, etc., appellant, v. ST. PAUL FIRE MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, respondent.

DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment. The grant of summary judgment was not premature since the plaintiff failed to demonstrate that further discovery would uncover any triable issue of fact (see, Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562 ;Parisi v. Leppard, 237 A.D.2d 419 ; Carrington v. City of New York, 201 A.D.2d 525, 527 ). Moreover, the evidence submitted by the defendant demonstrated a lack of coverage for which no prompt disclaimer was required (see, Handelsman v. Sea Ins. Co., 85 N.Y.2d 96, 99 ; Zappone v. Home Ins. Co., 55 N.Y.2d 131, 132 ).

The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

SCHATZ v. ST. PAUL FIRE MARINE INSURANCE
(Feb 10, 2000)