UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY plf-res, v. ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL., def-ap

12260-12261. UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY plf-res, v. ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL., def-ap — [AND A THIRDPARTY ACTION] O'Connor Redd, LLP, Port Chester (Joseph M. Cianflone of counsel), for ap — Havkins Rosenfeld Ritzert & Varriale, LLP, Mineola (Amol N. Christian of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Julia I. Rodriguez, J.), entered October 16, 2012, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied defendants FICA Transportation, Inc., S.L. Benfica Transportation, Inc. and Krasdale Foods, Inc.'s (the FICA defendants) pre-answer motion to dismiss plaintiffs' fourth cause of action in their declaratory judgment complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Order, same court and Justice, entered November 5, 2012, which granted plaintiffs' motion to consolidate the aforementioned declaratory judgment action with a related third party action, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

12260-12261. UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY plf-res, v. ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL., def-ap — [AND A THIRDPARTY ACTION] O’Connor Redd, LLP, Port Chester (Joseph M. Cianflone of counsel), for ap — Havkins Rosenfeld Ritzert & Varriale, LLP, Mineola (Amol N. Christian of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Julia I. Rodriguez, J.), entered October 16, 2012, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied defendants FICA Transportation, Inc., S.L. Benfica Transportation, Inc. and Krasdale Foods, Inc.’s (the FICA defendants) pre-answer motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ fourth cause of action in their declaratory judgment complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Order, same court and Justice, entered November 5, 2012, which granted plaintiffs’ motion to consolidate the aforementioned declaratory judgment action with a related third party action, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The motion court correctly denied the FICA defendants’ motion to dismiss the fourth cause of action. In or about May 2002, plaintiff Rose Trucking Corp. and defendant FICA Transportation entered into an agreement by which FICA was to transport Rose Trucking’s trailers to supermarkets in the New York, New Jersey and Connecticut area. As part of this agreement, FICA Transportation agreed to provide $1 million of insurance coverage. The policy obtained by FICA named Rose Trucking as an additional insured and provided $1 million of coverage, subject to a $250,000 deductible. In light of this provision, the fourth cause of action states a cognizable claim by seeking a declaration that because the FICA defendants were contractually obligated to provide $1 million dollars in insurance, with no mention of a deductible, they must pay any deductible owed by Rose Trucking (see e.g. Inner City Redevelopment Corp. v. Thyssenkrupp El. Corp., 78 AD3d 613 [1st Dept 2010]).

UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY plf-res, v. ACE AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL., def-ap

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal