Legal Opinion

Schleimer v. Empire Mutual Insurance

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided October 13, 1972PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Per curiam

The issue in this case is whether an insurer of an automobile is under a duty to give notice to a party named as loss payee ” of cancellation of the policy.

A party so designated has generally been considered to be a mere appointee with the right to receive the proceeds of the loss to the extent of his interest. Under a limited loss payable clause the rule is that if the policy is not collectible by the insured, the appointee cannot recover (5A Appleman, Insurance Law and Practice, § 3335, pp. 143, 144, 146). There are, of course, loss payable clauses which more fully protect the interests of…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. East Side Garage, Inc. v. New Brunswick Fire InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1921

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Gallant v. Lake States Mutual InsuranceMichigan Court of Appeals · 1985
  2. Chemical Bank v. United States Lines (S.A.), Inc. (In Re McLean Industries, Inc.)United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · 1991
  3. Old Kent Bank of Holland v. Chaddock, Winter & AlbertsMichigan Court of Appeals · 1992
  4. Vargas v. Nautilus InsuranceSupreme Court of Kansas · 1991
  5. Schleimer v. Empire Mutual InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1974

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

Powered by the Exa API