Legal Opinion
Home Insurance v. Aurigemma
New York Supreme Court
Decided March 15, 1965PublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtNicholas M. Pette, J.
This is an action for a judgment declaring that the defendant Aurigemma is not covered under the terms of the comprehensive personal liability protection of the standard homeowner’is insurance Policy No. 260051 (renewal of No. 250010) issued to 'him by plaintiff for the three-year *876period from July 20, 1969 to July 20, 1962, which policy was in full force and effect on July 12, 1960 and from the date of its issuance until said date of .expiration.
Said policy provided comprehensive personal liability protection for defendant Aurigemma (hereinafter: “Insured”), as follows:
‘ ‘ PROVISIONS…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Flint v. Stone Tracy Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Hartol Products Corp. v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaNew York Court of Appeals · 1943
- Morgan v. Greater New York Taxpayers Mutual InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1953
- Ritchie v. Anchor Casualty Co.California Court of Appeal · 1955
- Matsuo Yoshida and Chisato Yoshida v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1957
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by39 opinions
- Gulf Insurance Company v. TilleyDistrict Court, N.D. Indiana · 1967
- Asbury v. Indiana Union Mutual Insurance Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1982
- Stanley v. American Fire & Cas. Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1978
- Fadden v. Cambridge Mutual Fire InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1966
- Pacific Indemnity Insurance v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.