Legal Opinion

Dinnerman v. Boston Insurance

City of New York Municipal Court

Decided May 6, 1943PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKeller, J.

This motion will be granted to the extent of striking from the answer all references in paragraphs 6 to 9, inclusive, to another and different policy, not the one upon which this action is predicated. It seems that the policy covering the contents of the building was a separate and different contract of insurance. Therefore, it may not be brought into the case by means of allegations in the answer, though the matters there alleged might perhaps constitute basis for cross-examination of plaintiff’s assignor. Paragraph 10 is also stricken out. There appears to have been no affirmative duty on…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Andrew J. Mavros v. St. Paul Fire And Marine Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1961
  2. Du Bois v. Camden Fire Ins.District Court, E.D. New York · 1948
  3. Mavros v. St. Paul Fire & Marine InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1961

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API