Legal Opinion

Peka, Inc. v. Kaye

New York Supreme Court

Decided October 14, 1955PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtEder, J.

This is a motion by the underwriters doing business as Lloyd’s of London, Ltd. (herein referred to as Lloyd’s) to dismiss pursuant to rule 106 a third-party complaint as insufficient in law. The motion is directly based on subdivision 3 of section 167 of the Insurance Law, excluding from insurance coverage “ any liability of an assured because of death of or injuries to his or her spouse * * * unless express provision relating specifically thereto is included in the policy ”.

Since 1937, when this enactment went into effect simultaneously with the amendment of section 57 of the Domestic…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Fuchs v. London & Lancashire Indemnity Co. of AmericaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1940
  2. Feinman v. Bernard Rice Sons, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1955
  3. Kaye v. DoeNew York Supreme Court · 1953
  4. Katz v. WesselNew York Supreme Court · 1955
  5. Kane v. Kane Ship Repair Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1952

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Minners v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1969
  2. Clifton Products, Inc. v. American Universal InsuranceDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1959
  3. Smith v. Employer's Fire InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1972
  4. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. DeLoshNew York Supreme Court · 1973
  5. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. FranklinNew York Supreme Court · 1973

2 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