Legal Opinion
State Farm Insurance v. Trezza
New York Supreme Court
Decided December 9, 1983PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Jeffrey G. Stark, J.
On this motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff insurer seeks a declaration that it has no obligation under its homeowner’s policy to defend the defendant Michael Trezza1 in an action brought by defendant estate of Simberg relying upon the policy provision excluding damages that were “expected or intended”. In the underlying action, the claimant estate charged in its original complaint that Trezza (hereinafter the insured) intentionally battered the decedent causing injuries which resulted in death. On this motion, neither the claimant nor the…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Ruder & Finn Inc. v. Seaboard Surety Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1981
- International Paper Co. v. Continental Casualty Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1974
- Goldberg v. Lumber Mutual Casualty InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1948
- Prashker v. United States Guarantee Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1956
- Public Service Mutual Insurance v. GoldfarbNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Federal Insurance v. Cablevision Systems Development Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 1986
- State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Irene S.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
- Newton v. NORFOLK & DEDHAM MUTUAL FIRE INS. COMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1988
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. HowardDistrict Court, S.D. Georgia · 2013
- Allstate Insurance v. MugaveroNew York Supreme Court · 1989
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.