Legal Opinion
Uniland Development Co. v. Home Insurance
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided November 4, 1983PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Order unanimously reversed, without costs, and motion granted. Memorandum: Barring any allegation in the complaint seeking to “vindicate a public right or deter morally culpable conduct, punitive damages are not recoverable” (Halpin v Prudential Ins. Co., 48 NY2d 906, 907). Allegations of willful and intentional refusal to pay (under terms of the policy) are insufficient (Halpin v Prudential Ins. Co., supra; Reifenstein v Allstate Ins. Co., 92 AD2d 715). Therefore, the fourth cause of action seeking punitive damages must be dismissed. The fifth cause of action, seeking attorney’s fees, is…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Halpin v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
- Sukup v. State of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1967
- Royal Globe Insurance v. Chock Full O'Nuts Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1982
- Reifenstein v. Allstate InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- Bruno v. Home Mutual InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
3Cited by3 opinions
- City of Niagara Falls v. Hartford Fire InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
- Parks v. Cambridge Mutual Fire InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
- Piduch v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986