From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tower Ins. v. Diaz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 15, 2009
58 A.D.3d 495 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)

Opinion

No. 5051.

January 15, 2009.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Doris Ling-Cohan, J.), entered July 15, 2008, which, inter alia, denied plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on its first cause of action seeking a declaration that it has no duty to defend or indemnify defendants Segundo Diaz, Jr. and Christina Diaz in the underlying personal injury action, and upon a search of the record, granted summary judgment in favor of said defendants on that cause of action, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Max W. Gershweir, New York, for appellant.

Weber Pullin, LLP, Woodbury (Allan L. Pullin of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Tom, J.P., Gonzalez, Buckley, Sweeny and Catterson, JJ.


We agree with the motion court that the property on which occurred the accident that gave rise to the underlying action is an "[i]nsured location" within the meaning of the subject policy, which defines that term as, inter alia, "[v]acant land, other than farm land, owned by or rented to an `insured,'" and "[l]and owned by or rented to an `insured' on which a one or two family dwelling is being built as a residence for an `insured'" ( see White v Continental Cas. Co., 9 NY3d 264, 267). We also agree that the word "built" encompasses the work being done here, i.e., the addition of a second floor to the building located on the property. In any event, to the extent that that term is ambiguous, the ambiguity must be resolved in defendants' favor ( id.).


Summaries of

Tower Ins. v. Diaz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 15, 2009
58 A.D.3d 495 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
Case details for

Tower Ins. v. Diaz

Case Details

Full title:TOWER INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK, Appellant, v. SEGUNDO DIAZ, JR., et…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Jan 15, 2009

Citations

58 A.D.3d 495 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)
2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 132
871 N.Y.S.2d 123

Citing Cases

Xl Specialty Insurance v. Level Global Investors

“If the terms of a policy are ambiguous, however, any ambiguity must be construed in favor of the insured and…

Voli v. Cambridge Mut. Fire Ins. Co.

Contrary to the insurer's assertions, the meaning of the words "being built" do not require a determination…