Legal Opinion
Kansas City Fire & Marine Insurance v. Hartford Insurance Group
New York Court of Appeals
Decided October 19, 1982PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order appealed from and the order brought up for review should be reversed and judgment granted declaring that Hartford and Jefferson are to contribute in amounts in accordance with their settlement agreement. Mutual excess policies covering the same risk cancel each other out (Federal Ins. Co. v Atlantic Nat. Ins. Co., 25 NY2d 71). Here, neither clause contains language specifically making one an excess insurer over all other excess insurers *923covering the same risk, and neither one contains language the plain meaning of which would be distorted by the…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co. v. Allstate InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- Federal Insurance v. Atlantic National InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1969
- Pub. Serv. Mut. Ins. Co. v. FIREMAN'S FUND AM. INS. COS.New York Court of Appeals · 1982
3Cited by12 opinions
- State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. LiMauroNew York Court of Appeals · 1985
- Jefferson Insurance v. Travelers Indemnity Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1998
- Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- South Carolina Insurance v. Fidelity & Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1997
- St. Paul Mercury Insurance v. Lexington InsuranceDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 1995
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.