Furia v. Mellucci
New York Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Lewis R. Friedman, J.
It is the well-established rule in this State that "whether a defendant has or has not obtained insurance is irrelevant to the issues, and, since highly prejudicial, therefore, inadmissible.” (Leotta v Plessinger, 8 NY2d 449, 461; Simpson v Foundation Co., 201 NY 479, 490; Van Romapaye Trucking Corp. v Heebner, 85 NYS2d 347, 348; Butera v Donner, 177 Misc 966, 970; cf., CPLR 3101 [f].) This case raises the question of when, despite that rule, proof of insurance may be admitted in a tort case.
Plaintiff was a mason injured in a fall from a scaffold at a…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Ferris v. . SterlingNew York Court of Appeals · 1915
- Leotta v. PlessingerNew York Court of Appeals · 1960
- Simpson v. . Foundation Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1911
- Oltarsh v. Aetna InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1965
- Shutt v. PooleyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1973
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Furia v. MellucciAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990