Published on:

Plaintiff Seriously Injured in a Construction Accident

The plaintiff in the case is Tower Insurance Company of New York. The defendants in the case are Jose Reyes and Camille Khan.

Case History
A New York Injury Lawyer said the case is a declaratory judgment action. The plaintiff, Tower Insurance Company of New York, is seeking a judgment to declare that it does not have a duty to indemnify or defend the defendant in a personal injury action that is titled Reyes versus Khan.

The plaintiff is seeking an order to grant movant summary judgment in their favor in this declaratory judgment action.

The defendant, Jose Reyes, cross moves for a declaration that states that Tower Insurance Company does have a duty to defend him in the Khan Reyes Action.

Case Background
Reyes is an employee of Aerco Construction Company. While working on October 28, 2006, Reyes was injured in a construction accidentwhile working at a site on Liberty Avenue that is owned by Khan. He commenced the action against Khan on August 28, 2007. He alleges causes of action as negligence and a violation of labor law 200, 240, and 241.

Tower Insurance Company issued a homeowners insurance policy to Khan for the property on February 2, 2006 and the policy expired on February 2, 2007. Tower Insurance Company disclaimed coverage for the accident stating the property did not qualify as an “insured location.”

According to the defendant, Tower Insurance Company, in order for the property to be covered by the policy, Kahn would have to reside on the property. The company claims that Khan never lived in the property.

Case Discussion
In a declaratory judgment action, a defendant must establish the rights of the parties on a particular subject matter. Evidence must be established to prove prima facie by the movant.

In this case the policy that was issued to Khan states that the property is owned, occupied and a two family home. A Bronx Personal Injury Lawyer said the application for insurance submitted to the defendant specifically asks whether the applicant owns any other residence and this is answered “no.” Kahn states that she does not recall signing any of the agreements for the insurance policy. She also does not deny that the application for the policy misrepresents her view of the property.

The policy clearly states that an insured location consists of the premises where the policy holder resides. Residence premises are defined as a two family dwelling where you live in at least one of the units.

Case Results
In summary, it is determined that the defendants opposition of the policy attempts to create a coverage for the property that did not exist. For this reason the court has ordered the following;

The motion for summary judgment by Tower Insurance Company declaring they are not obliged to provide a defense for or provide coverage for the defendant Camille Khan in the personal injury action of Reyes versus Khan is granted. It is also declared that Tower Insurance Company does not have to provide coverage for or defense to Camille Khan in the pending action in Kings County.

A Brooklyn Personal Injury Lawyer said the cross motion by Jose Reyes for a summary judgment is denied in this case. The Court also orders that Tower Insurance Company of New York shall be awarded all costs and disbursements as taxed by the Clerk of the Court upon an appropriate bill of costs being submitted.

Anyone that finds that they are in need of legal advice may contact the law offices of Stephen Bilkis & Associates. The lawyers of the firm can help you determine the type of legal action that you may consider pursuing. We have offices conveniently located throughout the city of New York. You may contact us for a free consultation at any time.

Contact Information