Legal Opinion
Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Michigan Mutual Insurance
New York Court of Appeals
Decided May 3, 1984PublishedCited by 87 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Meyer, J.
An insurer which carries both the general liability coverage and the workers’ compensation coverage of three affiliated companies may be liable, when an employee of one of the companies sues the other two for injuries incurred in the course of his employment, for failure to comply with the demand of the excess carrier for the same three companies that the two companies sued implead the employer company, if the primary carrier cannot show a good-faith basis for its refusal. The order of the Appellate Division should, therefore, be affirmed, with costs.
Michigan…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1978
- American Surety Co. v. DiamondNew York Court of Appeals · 1956
- Trojcak v. WrynnAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1974
3Cited by87 opinions
- Pennsylvania General Insurance v. Austin Powder Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1986
- North Star Reinsurance Corp. v. Continental InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
- American Centennial Insurance Co. v. Canal Insurance Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1992
- Christiania General Insurance Corporation of New York v. Great American Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1992
- Commercial Union Insurance v. Medical Protective Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1986
82 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.