Government Employees Insurance v. Kligler
New York Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed.
While it is true that policies of insurance are to be construed liberally in favor of the insured and strictly against the insurer, where the provisions of the policy are clear and unambiguous, they must be given their plain and ordinary meaning, and courts should refrain from rewriting the agreement (State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v Westlake, 35 NY2d 587; Johnson v Travelers Ins. Co., 269 NY 401). The automobile liability policy in question affords coverage to the "named insured” in the event of an accident involving the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. WestlakeNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
- Johnson v. Travelers Insurance Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1936
3Cited by131 opinions
- Albert J. Schiff Associates, Inc. v. FlackNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. AnnunziataNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- Maurice Goldman & Sons, Inc. v. Hanover InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1992
- Westchester Resco Co., L.P. v. New England Reinsurance Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1987
- Town of Harrison v. National Union Fire InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
126 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.