From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bretton v. Mutual of Omaha Insurance Company

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Dec 26, 1985
66 N.Y.2d 1020 (N.Y. 1985)

Summary

stating that courts should not disregard pro-visions of contract that are clear and unequivocal

Summary of this case from Life Receivables Tr. v. Goshawk Syndicate

Opinion

Decided December 26, 1985

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, Edward J. Greenfield, J.

Gerald J. Mondora for appellant.

Anthony J. Mercorella for respondent.



On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 N.Y.CRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in the opinion by Justice Joseph P. Sullivan at the Appellate Division ( 110 A.D.2d 46).

Concur: Chief Judge WACHTLER and Judges JASEN, MEYER, SIMONS, KAYE, ALEXANDER and TITONE.


Summaries of

Bretton v. Mutual of Omaha Insurance Company

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Dec 26, 1985
66 N.Y.2d 1020 (N.Y. 1985)

stating that courts should not disregard pro-visions of contract that are clear and unequivocal

Summary of this case from Life Receivables Tr. v. Goshawk Syndicate
Case details for

Bretton v. Mutual of Omaha Insurance Company

Case Details

Full title:SHARON BRETTON, Appellant, v. MUTUAL OF OMAHA INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Dec 26, 1985

Citations

66 N.Y.2d 1020 (N.Y. 1985)
499 N.Y.S.2d 397
489 N.E.2d 1299

Citing Cases

RM Realty Holdings Corp. v. Moore

It did not, however, negate another provision in the DRA. In Bretton v Mutual of Omaha Ins. Co. ( 110 AD2d…

Westview Associates v. Guaranty National Ins. Co.

Those provisions would be completely unnecessary if, as defendant argues, all of the exclusions in the…