RLI INSURANCE COMPANY v. STEELY
(N.Y.A.D. 2nd Dept., August 4, 2009)
An insured maintained a primary homeowner’s policy and a separate umbrella policy, issued by separate insurers. He was sued in connection with a boating accident. The primary homeowner’s insurer disclaimed, citing an exclusion relating to the insured’s ownership of the boat. The umbrella insurer sued, seeking a declaration that the exclusion was inapplicable and that its policy was excess. The primary homeowner’s insurer moved to dismiss, citing the umbrella insurer’s lack of standing. New York’s Appellate Division, Second Department, quoting Mortillaro v Public Serv. Mut. Ins. Co., 285 AD2d 586, 587 (N.Y.A.D. 2nd Dept.2001), held that “‘so long as the plaintiff stands to benefit from the policy’” it had standing to commence declaratory judgment action before a judgment against the insured in the underlying action is entered. Since the umbrella carrier stood to benefit, it had standing to sue.
For a copy of the RLI Insurance Company v. Steely decision, click here
For a copy of the Mortillaro v. Public Serv. Mut. Ins. Co. decision, click here
By Sarah J. Delaney and Richard J. Cohen