Legal Opinion
Garry v. Worldwide Underwriters Insurance
New York Supreme Court
Decided July 15, 1983PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Joseph D. Mintz, J.
Defendant moved to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint for failure to state a cause of action. Defendant has not yet answered and defendant’s time to answer hasn’t expired. For the purposes of this motion, the facts alleged are deemed admitted and are as follows: At all times relevant herein, plaintiff’s automobile was insured by a policy issued by defendant in New York State. Plaintiff suffered serious personal injuries in an automobile accident while driving his own automobile. Said accident occurred solely as the result of a third-party’s negligence, which…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Ruder & Finn Inc. v. Seaboard Surety Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1981
- Allstate Insurance v. Klock Oil Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
- Hollander v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978
- Cantanucci v. Reliance InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1973
- Little v. Blue Cross of Western New York, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Matter of Allstate Ins. Co.(stolarz-Njm)New York Court of Appeals · 1993
- State Automobile Mutual Insurance v. YoulerWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1990
- United Community Insurance v. MucatelNew York Supreme Court · 1985
- Passaro v. Metropolitan Property & Liability InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1985
- Federal Insurance v. ReingoldAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.