Home/Case Law/Weiss v. Tri-State Consumer Insurance
Regular Panel Decision DecisionAppeal Decision

Weiss v. Tri-State Consumer Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
MISSING

CompFox AI Summary

This case involves an appeal concerning the amount of supplementary uninsured/underinsured motorist (SUM) coverage available under an insurance policy issued by Tri-State Consumer Insurance Company. The plaintiffs, daughters and administrators of the estates of Rifka and Anton Goldenberg who died in a car accident, sought $400,000 in SUM coverage. Tri-State contended the coverage was limited to $145,000, arguing that payments from the tortfeasor's insurer ($100,000) and a Dram Shop recovery ($255,000) reduced the $500,000 policy limit. The Supreme Court initially granted the plaintiffs' motion for $400,000 in coverage and denied Tri-State's cross-motion. However, the appellate court reversed this decision, ruling that the Dram Shop recovery, as damages from sources other than motor vehicle liability insurance, correctly reduced the SUM endorsement, thus limiting the available coverage to $145,000.

Weiss v. Tri-State Consumer Insurance is a workers' compensation case decided in Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York. This case addresses legal issues related to compensation claims, benefits, and court rulings.

It is commonly referenced in legal research involving workers' compensation laws in Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.

Full Decision Text1 Pages

This case involves an appeal concerning the amount of supplementary uninsured/underinsured motorist (SUM) coverage available under an insurance policy issued by Tri-State Consumer Insurance Company. The plaintiffs, daughters and administrators of the estates of Rifka and Anton Goldenberg who died in a car accident, sought $400,000 in SUM coverage. Tri-State contended the coverage was limited to $145,000, arguing that payments from the tortfeasor's insurer ($100,000) and a Dram Shop recovery ($255,000) reduced the $500,000 policy limit. The Supreme Court initially granted the plaintiffs' motion for $400,000 in coverage and denied Tri-State's cross-motion. However, the appellate court reversed this decision, ruling that the Dram Shop recovery, as damages from sources other than motor vehicle liability insurance, correctly reduced the SUM endorsement, thus limiting the available coverage to $145,000.

Read the full decision

Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.

Weiss v. Tri-State Consumer Insurance workers compensation case in Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York. Legal case summary, ruling, and analysis for attorneys and legal research.

Weiss v. Tri-State Consumer Insurance case law summary from Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York. Workers compensation legal decision, case analysis, and court ruling details.

Weiss v. Tri-State Consumer Insurance Case Analysis

Weiss v. Tri-State Consumer Insurance is a legal case related to workers' compensation in Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York. This case explains important rulings, legal interpretations, and claim decisions.

Ready to streamline your practice?

Apply these legal strategies instantly. CompFox helps you find decisions, analyze reports, and draft pleadings in minutes.