by John J. Tollefsen | Apr 3, 2014 | Blog, Insurance NY
Voss v Netherlands Ins. Co., 22 NY3d 728, 96 AD3d 1543 (February 25, 2014) Decision: 2014_01259-voss-v-netherlands If there is a loss and the insurance does not cover it, many people tend to blame the insurance broker. In New York, the broker is protected by the “special relationship” rule. What makes this case standout is the four to three decision in what should have been an easy win for the broker. The case was sent back for trial. The property damage and the consequent business interruption was sustained as a result of water damage that occurred following three separate roof breaches in 2007 and 2008. “Following discovery, CHI moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. CHI advanced three arguments in favor of dismissal. First, CHI asserted that no special relationship was created and, in the absence of a specific request by the insureds for coverage that went unfulfilled, CHI could not be held liable for failing to recommend or obtain higher limits. Second, it contended that the negligence claim failed based on Voss’s admission that she had received the policies and was fully aware of the $75,000 policy limit that applied to the first two losses and the $30,000 policy limit in effect at the time of the third loss. Third, CHI claimed that, even if a special relationship existed, any breach of its duty to plaintiffs was not the proximate cause of their injuries. Instead, plaintiffs’ damages occurred because Netherlands failed to timely pay the policy limits. Supreme Court granted CHI’s motion and dismissed the complaint, agreeing with each of CHI’s contentions. The Appellate Division, with one Justice dissenting,...
