Legal Opinion

Kannatt v. Valley Forge Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided June 17, 1996PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The plaintiffs’ basement was flooded after a heavy rainstorm. Their homeowner’s insurance policy, issued by the defendant, contained an exclusion for "loss caused directly or indirectly by * * * flood, surface water, waves, tidal water, overflow of a body of water, or spray from any of these, whether or not driven by wind”. In support of its motion for summary judgment, the defendant established that the loss was caused by surface water flowing down the incline of the backyard into the basement through the bottom of the basement door. Thus, *565the defendant proved that an excluded peril was the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Zuckerman v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
  2. Album Realty Corp. v. American Home Assurance Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1992
  3. Casey v. General Accident InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
  4. Novick v. United Services Automobile Ass'nAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Neuman v. United Services Automobile Ass'nAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
  2. Greenberg v. Privilege Underwriters Reciprocal Exch.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2019
  3. Papadopoulos v. Cambridge Mutual Fire InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
  4. Papadopoulos v. Cambridge Mutual Fire InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API