New York CM Report of Recent Decisions
2003 Volume 4
A summary of significant recent developments in the law focusing on substantive issues of litigation and featuring analysis and commentary on special points of interest.
Download this publication as a PDF
Articles in this report
"Replacement Cost" Includes Profit and Overhead Even if Not Actually Incurred
In Mazzocki v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Corp., 766 N.Y.2d 719 (3d Dept, several homeowners sustained storm damage to buildings on their respective properties and thereafter brought a putative class action suit against State Farm. Plaintiffs alleged the carrier’s exclusion of the profit and overhead expenses of a general contractor in calculating the “actual cash value” of the plaintiffs’ damaged properties constituted a breach of State Farm’s homeowners’ policies.
Court of Appeals Examines Absolute Liability and Labor Law ยง240(1)
In its most recent interpretation of Labor Law §240(1), the State’s highest court has emphatically refused to impose liability on defendant where plaintiff is the sole proximate cause of his own injury.
New York Appellate Court Deems Pollution Exclusion Ambiguous --Finds Fact Question Presented as to Whether Asbestos Qualifies as a "Pollutant" Under Exclusion
Affirming the denial of insurer’s motion for summary judgment, the New York Appellate Division, Second Department holds that although asbestos may be a “thermal irritant” as listed in the policies’ pollution exclusion, failure to expressly include the term “asbestos” within the definition of “pollutant” creates ambiguity giving rise to a fact question as to whether asbestos is a “pollutant” within the meaning of the exclusion. Village Mall at Hillcrest Condominium v. Merrimack Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 766 N.Y.S. 2d 70 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003).
