From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Avdeychik v. Allstate Ins. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 31, 2003
303 A.D.2d 700 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2002-05546

Argued March 4, 2003.

March 31, 2003.

In an action to recover benefits under an automobile insurance policy, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Joseph, J.), entered May 7, 2002, which granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

Bruno, Gerbino Soriano, LLP, Melville, N.Y. (Charles W. Benton of counsel), for appellant.

Abrams, Gorelick, Friedman Jacobson, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Alexander Perchekly of counsel), for respondent.

Before: DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., FRED T. SANTUCCI, SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff seeks to recover benefits under an automobile insurance policy for the claimed theft and subsequent damage to his vehicle, which was insured by the defendant. The plaintiff established his prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on the issue of liability by submitting proof that there was a valid policy of insurance covering the subject automobile, a loss occurred, a timely claim was made, and the loss fell within the terms of the policy (see Palmier v. United States Fid. Guar. Co., 135 A.D.2d 1057; see generally Winegrad v. New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 N.Y.2d 851). In opposition thereto, the defendant's unsupported conjecture and speculation that the vehicle had not been stolen failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the plaintiff intentionally concealed or misrepresented any material fact or circumstance relating to the theft or engaged in fraudulent conduct (see Affatato v. Standard Fire Ins. Co., 277 A.D.2d 264; Berman v. Federal Ins. Co., 110 A.D.2d 803). The defendant also failed to raise an issue of fact as to whether the plaintiff made material misrepresentations on his application for insurance (see DiDonna v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 259 A.D.2d 727).

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

RITTER, J.P., SANTUCCI, FEUERSTEIN and SCHMIDT, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Avdeychik v. Allstate Ins. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 31, 2003
303 A.D.2d 700 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Avdeychik v. Allstate Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:YEVGENY AVDEYCHIK, respondent, v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, appellant

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

Date published: Mar 31, 2003

Citations

303 A.D.2d 700 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
758 N.Y.S.2d 80

Citing Cases

Drysdale v. Allstate Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co.

The first cause of action sought damages for the defendant's alleged breach of contract, and the second cause…

Com. Life Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. Wallace

The Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment in favor of All State on its first counterclaim declaring…