From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Woodson v. American Transit Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 20, 2001
281 A.D.2d 282 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

March 20, 2001.

Interim judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered January 26, 2000, which awarded plaintiffs the principal sum of $444,648.02 against defendant American Transit Insurance Company, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Eric S. Levine, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Before: Rosenberger, J.P., Williams, Mazzarelli, Andrias, Rubin, JJ.


Plaintiffs commenced this action pursuant to Insurance Law § 3420(a)(1) to enforce a judgment obtained in a personal injury action in which the infant plaintiff was injured by a truck owned by defendant's insured. A final judgment of $4.17 million, including $757,368.66 in pre-judgment interest, was entered against defendant's insured. The insurance policy provision at issue provides that, in addition to the face value of the policy ($1 million), the insurer will pay:

All interest on the full amount of any judgment that accrues after entry of judgment in any "suit" we defend; but our duty to pay interest ends when we have paid, offered to pay or deposited in court the part of the judgment that is within our Limit of Insurance (emphasis added).

Contrary to plaintiffs' argument, the policy unambiguously provides that the obligation to pay interest terminates once the insurer has tendered or paid an amount up to the policy limit, in this case, $1,757,368.66. The IAS court therefore correctly held that, as of January 16, 1998, when defendant had paid plaintiffs approximately $1,760,000, its contractual liability to pay further sums for post-judgment interest ended. Plaintiffs' argument, that defendant's obligation to pay post-judgment interest on the judgment does not cease until defendant has paid all interest due on the judgment, runs counter to the clear provisions of the policy provision and renders meaningless the proviso that the obligation to pay interest ends "when [the insurer has] paid . . . the part of the judgment that is within [the insurer's] Limit of Insurance". Such an interpretation should be rejected (see, Yoi-Lee Realty Corp. v. 177thSt. Realty Assocs. 208 A.D.2d 185, 190).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Woodson v. American Transit Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 20, 2001
281 A.D.2d 282 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Woodson v. American Transit Insurance

Case Details

Full title:ZACHARY WOODSON, ETC., ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. AMERICAN TRANSIT…

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

Date published: Mar 20, 2001

Citations

281 A.D.2d 282 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
722 N.Y.S.2d 138

Citing Cases

Vigilant v. Stearns

( Belt Painting Corp. v TIG Ins. Co., 100 NY2d 377; RJC Realty Holding Corp. v Republic Franklin Ins. Co., 2…

Miraglia v. Essex Ins. Co.

See also, Muzak Corp. v. Hotel Taft Corp., 1 NY2d 42, 46, 150 NYS2d 171, 174, 133 NE2d 688, 690(1956)["The…