Legal Opinion
Carlino v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided October 19, 1989PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Hancock, Jr., J.
A married couple residing in the same household purchased two separate liability insurance policies from the same insurer *353covering their separately owned vehicles. The policies, each of which had a maximum limit of $75,000 for excess insurance, were identical; each afforded coverage to their son, a member of the household, who was involved in an accident while driving another car. We hold that by the terms of the standard form "other insurance” clause, the insurer is bound to contribute to the full extent of its coverage in each policy, thus making the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Miller v. Continental InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
- Stainless, Inc. v. Employers Fire InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979
- Stainless, Inc. v. Employers' Fire InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co. v. Allstate InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- Matthews v. . American Central Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1897
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Home InsuranceMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1998
- In re the Arbitration between Allstate InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- Miller v. SullivanNew York Supreme Court · 1997
- Hough v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
- Rifkin v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1993
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.