Legal Opinion
Viviano v. Jewelers Mutual Insurance
Nassau County District Court
Decided September 10, 1982PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Henry J. Kalinowski, J.
The plaintiffs bring this suit to recover under an insurance policy for the loss of an engagement ring. The defendant has denied coverage based upon one of the exclusions of the policy.
The defendant has moved this court for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212 alleging that there exists no triable issue of fact and that one of the exclusions of the insurance policy in question applies to the present fact pattern.
The defendant contends that the language of the exclusion is clear and unambiguous in that the ring was not in the “care, custody and…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Breed v. Insurance Co. of North AmericaNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
- Miller v. Continental InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
- Thomas J. Lipton, Inc. v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
- Government Employees Insurance v. KliglerNew York Court of Appeals · 1977
- Sincoff v. Liberty Mutual Fire InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1962
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Boyd Motors, Inc. v. Employers Insurance of WausauCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1989
- Saritejdiam, Inc. v. Excess InsuranceDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1991
- Saritejdiam, Inc. v. Excess Insurance Company, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1992
- Saritejdiam, Inc. v. Excess InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1992
- Saritejdiam, Inc. v. Excess InsuranceCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1992