From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hammerick v. Nationwide Mutual Ins. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 5, 1985
110 A.D.2d 1058 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Opinion

April 5, 1985

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Monroe County, Kennedy, J.

Present — Hancock, Jr., J.P., Callahan, Denman, Green and O'Donnell, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: Defendant and third-party plaintiff Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company (Nationwide) appeals from an order granting plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, as well as granting summary judgment to third-party defendant New York Automobile Insurance Plan (Plan) and dismissing Nationwide's third-party complaint. Plaintiff was a passenger in a vehicle owned by third-party defendant Sandra Ehmer and operated by third-party defendant Douglas Ehmer (Ehmers). Plaintiff filed an uninsured motorist arbitration demand upon Nationwide pursuant to the provisions of an insurance policy issued to plaintiff's father. Nationwide received a stay of arbitration and plaintiff brought a declaratory judgment action seeking a determination whether the Ehmer vehicle was insured at the time of the accident. Thereafter, Nationwide commenced a third-party action against the Plan for a declaration of the Plan's obligations with respect to the automobile liability coverage and against the Ehmers for damages in the event their vehicle was in fact uninsured on the date of the accident.

Nationwide acknowledges that no insurance policy was in effect at the time of the accident. The Plan alleged that it never received an application for insurance of the Ehmer vehicle and Nationwide has failed to produce evidentiary proof in admissible form to refute this assertion ( see, Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562). There being no question of fact whether the Plan ever received an application for insurance of the Ehmer vehicle, the Plan had no obligation to make an assignment of coverage. Special Term, therefore, properly granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment in the declaratory judgment action.

Special Term properly dismissed Nationwide's third-party complaint because Nationwide failed to establish that the Plan owed any duty or obligation to Nationwide ( see, Alvord Swift v Muller Constr. Co., 46 N.Y.2d 276).


Summaries of

Hammerick v. Nationwide Mutual Ins. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Apr 5, 1985
110 A.D.2d 1058 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)
Case details for

Hammerick v. Nationwide Mutual Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:DAVID HAMMERICK, Respondent, v. NATIONWIDE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Apr 5, 1985

Citations

110 A.D.2d 1058 (N.Y. App. Div. 1985)

Citing Cases

Hammerick v. Nationwide Mutual Ins. Co.

Order unanimously affirmed, without costs. Same memorandum as in Hammerick v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co.…

Federal Ins. Co. v. Ramirez

No additional proof was forthcoming as to the Plan. Accordingly, the Plan is not obligated to issue a…