From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pangburn v. Travelers Insurance Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 31, 1999
259 A.D.2d 1044 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

March 31, 1999

Appeal from Order of Erie County Court, D'Amica, J. — Summary Judgment.


Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this action seeking payment on a policy of automobile insurance issued by Travelers Insurance Company (defendant). Plaintiff sought reimbursement for the alleged "theft" of an automobile seized by the Livingston County Sheriff's Department (Sheriff) and for depreciation of the vehicle over the two years during which it was impounded by the Sheriff. Plaintiff asserts that the "theft" was a "direct and accidental loss" covered by the policy. Plaintiff appeals from an order of Erie County Court affirming a judgment (denominated order) of Buffalo City Court granting defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

There is no merit to plaintiff's contention that the seizure and impounding of the vehicle by the Sheriff constituted a "theft" within the comprehensive loss provisions of the policy ( cf., Castner v. Insurance Co., 40 A.D.2d 1, 3-4; Sauer v. Vigilant Ins. Co., 102 Misc.2d 243, 245; see generally, Annotation, What Constitutes Theft Within Automobile Theft Insurance Policy — Modern Cases, 67 ALR 4th 82). In interpreting those provisions, we give effect to the ordinary definition of theft ( see, Block v. Standard Ins. Co., 292 N.Y. 270, 274) and are guided by what would be the reasonable expectations and purpose of an ordinary business person in making such a contract ( see, Bolling v. Northern Ins. Co., 253 App. Div. 693, 694-695, affd 280 N.Y. 510).

There is also no merit to plaintiff's claim for damage to the vehicle while in the custody of the Sheriff. As plaintiff himself characterizes that damage or loss, it is attributable solely to wear and tear to and depreciation of the vehicle as a result of the Sheriff's failure to maintain it. Defendant's adjuster confirmed that characterization, attributing the loss to rusting and other weather-related deterioration. Such damage does not fall within the policy definition, of loss:

Present — Denman, P. J., Green, Pine, Hayes and Hurlbutt, JJ.


Summaries of

Pangburn v. Travelers Insurance Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 31, 1999
259 A.D.2d 1044 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Pangburn v. Travelers Insurance Company

Case Details

Full title:MARK B. PANGBURN, Appellant, v. TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent…

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

Date published: Mar 31, 1999

Citations

259 A.D.2d 1044 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
688 N.Y.S.2d 339

Citing Cases

Wirth v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.

We reject that contention, and instead conclude that the court properly determined that the loss sustained…