Schmiemann v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company, 2004-01093.
| Decision Date | 20 December 2004 |
| Docket Number | 2003-03754.,2004-01093. |
| Parties | MATTHEW SCHMIEMANN et al., Respondents, v. STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the cross motion is denied, the motion is granted, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, for the entry of a judgment declaring that the defendants State Farm Fire and Casualty Company and State Farm Insurance Companies are not obligated to defend and indemnify the plaintiffs in the underlying personal injury action entitled Cubero v Schmiemann, pending in the Supreme Court, Queens County, under Index No. 25728/99.
In 1989 the plaintiffs became the owners of a residential rental property and purchased a rental-dwelling insurance policy issued by the defendants State Farm Fire and Casualty Company and State Farm Insurance Companies (hereinafter collectively State Farm). The policy provided coverage for personal injuries occurring on the premises. In March 1998 the defendant Victoria Cubero and her son moved into the plaintiffs' building, and in November 1999 commenced an action against the plaintiffs, inter alia, alleging that her infant son was injured when he ingested lead. The plaintiffs forwarded the complaint to their State Farm agent, and on December 21, 1999, State Farm denied coverage, stating that the alleged lead exposure fell "under the Lead Poisoning Exclusion Endorsement for the policy period of January 31, 1998 through January 31, 1999."
The plaintiffs then commenced the instant action for a judgment declaring that State Farm is obligated to defend and identify them in the underlying action, arguing that State Farm was bound by the greater coverage provided under the policy as originally issued because it never informed them that it was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Frankel v. Citicorp Ins. Serv., Inc.
...763, 543 N.Y.S.2d 541; Anzalone v. State Farm Mut. Ins. Co., 92 A.D.2d 238, 240, 459 N.Y.S.2d 850; cf. Schmiemann v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 13 A.D.3d 514, 515, 786 N.Y.S.2d 572; Badio v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 12 A.D.3d 229, 230, 785 N.Y.S.2d 52). Accordingly, there is a "substant......
-
Walker v. Erie Ins. Co.
...N.Y.S.2d 682 [4th Dept. 2013], lv denied 22 N.Y.3d 1169, 985 N.Y.S.2d 470, 8 N.E.3d 847 [2014] ; Schmiemann v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. , 13 A.D.3d 514, 515, 786 N.Y.S.2d 572 [2d Dept. 2004] ). Moreover, while defendant correctly points out that the summary and declaration pages of the po......
-
Walker v. Erie Ins. Co.
... ... ERIE INSURANCE COMPANY AND ERIE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK, ... Corp. v National Union ... Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., 25 N.Y.3d 675, 680 ... certificate accompanying the out-of-state ... certification letter as required by CPLR ... denied 22 N.Y.3d 1169 [2014]; Schmiemann v State ... Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 13 A.D.3d 514, ... ...