Nautilus Insurance Company v. Barfield Realty Corp. et al
| Nautilus Insurance Company |
| Barfield Realty Corp., Cedar Ave Laundromat SFIC and Joseph Castelli |
| 1:2011cv07425 |
| October 20, 2011 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of New York |
| Foley Square Office |
| XX Out of State |
| J. Paul Oetken |
| Insurance |
| 28 U.S.C. ยง 2201 |
| None |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
32
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER granting 15 Motion for Summary Judgment. It is undoubtedly true that under New York law the insurer bears the burden of establishing that an exclusionary clause applies. Shelby, 2007 WL 1180651, No. 06-Civ-3260, at *3. However , where the insurer meets its burden, and where the terms of a policy are unambiguous, summary judgment is appropriate. Here, Nautilus has met its burden. Accordingly, Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on its claims and Defendant Barfields count erclaims is GRANTED. This Court declares that the plain language of the Policy relieves Nautilus of any duty to indemnify or defend Defendants Barfield and Cedar Ave with respect to Castellis claims in the underlying state court action. Furthermore, this Court declares that Nautilus owes no duty to pay for Castellis medical expenses associated with the underlying action. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion at Docket No. 15 and to close this case. (Signed by Judge J. Paul Oetken on 10/16/2012) (ft)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Southern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
