You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Omega Casting Corp. v. Graphic Arts Mutual Insurance

Citations: 270 A.D.2d 126; 705 N.Y.S.2d 44; 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2986

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; March 20, 2000; New York; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The Supreme Court of New York County, under Justice Barbara Kapnick, issued an order on December 18, 1998, affirming the denial of the defendant-appellant's cross motion for summary judgment without costs. The insurance policy in question, issued by the defendant insurer to the plaintiff jewelry manufacturer, limits liability for loss due to theft of "patterns." The court found that it was not clear, as a matter of law, whether this limitation applied specifically to the theft of the insured's "models." The plaintiff's affidavits from other jewelry manufacturers were deemed sufficient to create a triable issue regarding the interchangeability of the terms "model" and "pattern" from the perspective of a jewelry manufacturer, countering the defendant's argument. The decision was concurred by Justices Rosenberger, Williams, Ellerin, and Saxe.

Legal Issues Addressed

Evidentiary Standard for Triable Issues

Application: The plaintiff's submission of affidavits from other jewelry manufacturers was considered sufficient to establish a triable issue regarding the interpretation of the terms 'model' and 'pattern.'

Reasoning: The plaintiff's affidavits from other jewelry manufacturers were deemed sufficient to create a triable issue regarding the interchangeability of the terms 'model' and 'pattern' from the perspective of a jewelry manufacturer, countering the defendant's argument.

Insurance Policy Interpretation

Application: The court found ambiguity in the insurance policy's language regarding the limitation of liability for theft of 'patterns,' as it was not clear whether this limitation also applied to 'models.'

Reasoning: The insurance policy in question, issued by the defendant insurer to the plaintiff jewelry manufacturer, limits liability for loss due to theft of 'patterns.' The court found that it was not clear, as a matter of law, whether this limitation applied specifically to the theft of the insured's 'models.'

Summary Judgment Denial

Application: The court denied the defendant-appellant's cross motion for summary judgment, indicating that there was a triable issue that required further examination.

Reasoning: The Supreme Court of New York County, under Justice Barbara Kapnick, issued an order on December 18, 1998, affirming the denial of the defendant-appellant's cross motion for summary judgment without costs.