Narrative Opinion Summary
The Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department, affirmed an order from the Supreme Court of Onondaga County that found Charter Oak Fire Insurance Company had breached its insurance contract with Vivian Stern, doing business as The Jeweler. However, the court concluded that the business failure of the plaintiff was not proximately caused by this breach. The plaintiff was awarded $7,887.19 in damages, plus interest. Additionally, the plaintiff's motion to correct the record was denied. The decision was entered on September 28, 2012, with no costs awarded.
Legal Issues Addressed
Award of Damages and Interestsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The plaintiff was awarded damages and interest despite the breach not being the proximate cause of business failure.
Reasoning: The plaintiff was awarded $7,887.19 in damages, plus interest.
Breach of Insurance Contractsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Charter Oak Fire Insurance Company was found to have breached its insurance contract with the plaintiff, Vivian Stern.
Reasoning: The Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department, affirmed an order from the Supreme Court of Onondaga County that found Charter Oak Fire Insurance Company had breached its insurance contract with Vivian Stern, doing business as The Jeweler.
Costs in Appellate Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: No costs were awarded in the appellate decision.
Reasoning: The decision was entered on September 28, 2012, with no costs awarded.
Denial of Motion to Correct Recordsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court denied the plaintiff's motion to correct the record.
Reasoning: Additionally, the plaintiff's motion to correct the record was denied.
Proximate Cause in Breach of Contractsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court determined that the breach of contract by the insurance company was not the proximate cause of the plaintiff's business failure.
Reasoning: However, the court concluded that the business failure of the plaintiff was not proximately caused by this breach.