Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. World Wide Rent-A-Car, Inc.

Citation276 N.Y.S.2d 401,52 Misc.2d 552
Decision Date30 December 1966
Docket NumberRENT-A-CA,INC
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court (New York)
PartiesThe AETNA CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. WORLD WIDE, Sun Insurance Company of New York, Joseph Cattano, an infant over the age of 14 years, by Peter Cattano, his parent, Lifetime Pools Equipment Corp. and Joseph L. Jordan, Defendants.

Allen M. Taylor, New York City (William H. Williamson, Jr., New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff.

Cymrot, Wolin & Simon, New York City, for defendant World Wide Rent-A-Car, Inc Smith & Formidoni, New York City, for defendant Sun Ins. Co. of N.Y.

S. Paul Fishman, Brooklyn, for defendant Jordan.

Mehrmann & Hall, Freeport, for defendants Cattano and Lifetime Pools Equipment Corp.

TILZER, Justice.

Plaintiff moves for summary judgment. Plaintiff brings this action for a judgment declaring that the defendant World Wide Rent-A-Car, Inc. is obliged to defend and to pay.

Plaintiff issued a family auto insurance policy to the defendant Peter Cattano. Defendant Lifetime Pools Equipment Corp. leased the subject motor vehicle from defendant World Wide, its owner. World Wide is self-insured. Consequently its coverage extends to the minimum standard requirements of the Insurance Law. The car was used by the personnel of Lifetime. Its president, the defendant Peter Cattano, permitted his infant son, the defendant Joseph Cattano, to use the car when the accident occurred. Defendant Sun Insurance Company of New York issued its policy to Lifetime covering non-owned cars, and in the circumstances here that policy is excess insurance. The infant defendant came into collision with a car operated by the defendant Joseph L. Jordan who instituted action against Joseph Cattano, World Wide and Lifetime. Under the lease between World Wide and Lifetime the subject car was to be operated by a licensed person not under the age of 21. The Insurance Law requires as to each policy issued that it meet standard minimum requirements and without regard to the legality of operation or age of the operator (Insurance Law, § 167 as amended). No lease arrangement may nullify the Insurance Law requirements which are deemed a part of every policy issued (Stuyvesant Insurance Co. of New York v. Renaldo, 41 Misc.2d 285, 245 N.Y.S.2d 728; Standard Accident Insurance Co. of Detroit v. Solomon, 195 Misc. 48, 88 N.Y.S.2d 667).

Plaintiff's policy issued to Peter Cattano insured him as to a non-owned vehicle with respect to 'any relative, but only with respect to a private passenger automobile or trailer, provided the actual use thereof is with the permission of the owner.' World Wide is the registered owner of the subject vehicle and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • White v. Smith
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of New Jersey
    • July 21, 1975
    ...and Avis Rent-A-Car, by G. Paul Crawshaw, Haddonfield, N.J. OPINION ON THE MOTION BY DEFENDANTS, CHRYSLER LEASING CORPORATION and AVIS RENT-A-CAR, FOR SUMMARY GERRY, District Judge. A two vehicle collision on the Atlantic City Expressway provides the factual framework within which this Cour......
  • Sternberg v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • December 11, 1972
    ...Insurance Law, § 167, subd. 2; Stuyvesant Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. Renaldo, 41 Misc.2d 285, 245 N.Y.S.2d 728; Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v. World Wide Rent-A-Car, 52 Misc.2d 552, 276 N.Y.S.2d 401, mod. 28 A.D.2d 286, 284 N.Y.S.2d 807.') Matter of Peters (State Farm Mutual), 58 Misc.2d 738, 296 N.Y.S.......
  • Peters v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • December 24, 1968
    ...§ 167, subd. 2; Stuyvesant Insurance Co. of New York v. Renaldo, 41 Misc.2d 285, 245 N.Y.S.2d 728; Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. World Wide Rent-A-Car Inc., 52 Misc.2d 552, 276 N.Y.S.2d 401, modified, and as modified, affirmed 28 A.D.2d 286, 284 N.Y.S.2d Based upon the facts and a review o......
  • Farmingdale Fire Dist. v. Government Emp. Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New York)
    • February 13, 1969
    ...is the primary insurer. Travelers which insures under a non-ownership clause is excess insurance. (Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Worldwide Rent-A-Car Inc., 52 Misc.2d 552, 276 N.Y.S.2d 401). A judgment will be entered declaring that the GEICO policy covers the plaintiff Farmingdale Fire Di......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT