Legal Opinion

Claim of Aioss v. Sardo

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided March 29, 1928PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtVan Kirk, P. J.

The question raised here involves only the liability of the carrier to an injured employee of the insured under its policy of insurance. Appellant’s position is that there was no insurance by the Maryland Casualty Company covering the accident; the purported policy was void because of false representations. There is in the policy in declaration item 6 this: “No similar insurance has been canceled by any insurance carrier during the past year — except as herein stated: No exceptions.” Among the conditions in the policy is this: “ The statements in Items 1 to 6, inclusive, in the Declarations…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Claim of Marino v. SardoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1927

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Matlock ex rel. Matlock v. HollisSupreme Court of Kansas · 1941
  2. Claim of Cruz v. New Millennium Construction & Restoration Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
  3. Points v. WillsNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1939
  4. AMERICAN MILLENNIUM INS. CO. v. BerganzaNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2006
  5. Claim of Ardolino v. IernaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1929

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API