Allstate Insurance v. Borczynski
Opinion of the Court
Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs and petition dismissed. Memorandum: We agree with respondent that the underinsured motorists coverage of petitioner’s policy applies to the accident involving infant Jeffrey Borczynski. There is no express requirement in the policy that an insured must be an operator of, or a passenger in, an insured vehicle in order to obtain benefits under that coverage. The general purpose of that coverage is to provide personal protection against the possibility of an accident with an uninsured or underinsured motorist (see, Governor’s Mem approving L 1977, ch 892, 1977 NY Legis Ann, at 310).
"In addition to the foregoing measures designed to contain costs, the bill makes other important improvements in the no-fault law including * * * the creation of 'supplementary uninsured motorist’ coverage so that an individual can fully protect himself against the possibility of an accident with an underinsured motorist” (Governor’s Mem approving L 1977, ch 892, 1977 NY Legis Ann, at 311). To interpret the policy in the manner urged by petitioner would negate that purpose. If
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.