ZKZ Associates LP v. CNA Insurance
Cases that cite this one
39 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- The Travelers Indemnity Company v. Underwriters at Lloyd's, London (Lloyd's London) (District Court, S.D. New York 2025)
- Peerless Ins. Co. v. Tech. Ins. Co. (District Court, E.D. New York 2019)
- Antoine v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2008)
- 71 Lafayette Ave. LLC v. New York Mar. & Gen. Ins. Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
- Peerless Ins. Co. v. Tech. Ins. Co. (2d Cir. 2020)
- Leading Insurance Group Insurance v. Greenwich Insurance (New York Supreme Court 2014)
- 523 BWAY, LLC v. Erie & Niagara Ins. Assn. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2025)
- Sterling Landlord Corp. v. Axis Ins. Co. (New York Supreme Court, New York County 2024)
- 1416 Coney Is. Realty, LLC v. Wesco Ins. Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2023)
- Technology Ins. Co., Inc. v. Main St. Am. Assur. Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
- Isidore Margel Trust Mitzi Zank Trustee v. Mt. Hawley Ins. Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
- Jones Mem. Hosp. v. Main St. Am. Assur. Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
- The Charter Oak Fire Insurance Company v. New York Marine and General Insurance Company (District Court, S.D. New York 2021)
- MIC General Insurance Corporation v. Cabrera (District Court, S.D. New York 2021)
- Wesco Ins. Co. v. Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. of Am. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
- Wesco Ins. Co. v. Travelers Prop. Cas. Co. of Am. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2020)
- Paramount Ins. Co. v. Federal Ins. Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
- Pixley Dev. Corp. v. Erie Ins. Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
- Tower Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. Leading Ins. Group Ins. Co., Ltd. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- Tower Insurance v. Leading Insurance Group Insurance (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- Tower Insurance v. Leading Insurance Group Insurance (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
- Mack-cali Realty Corp. v. NGM Insurance (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- Frank v. Continental Casualty Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- Vbh Luxury, Incorporated v. 940 Madison Associates LLC (N.Y. 2012)
- 1515 Broadway Fee Owner, LLC v. Seneca Insurance (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and the certified question answered in the affirmative.
As an additional insured under the policy issued to Guardian Pearl Street Garage Corp., plaintiff building owner was covered "only for liability arising out of the ownership, maintenance and use of that part of the described premises which is leased to [Guardian].” Although Guardian’s use of the plaintiff’s premises was governed by a "management agreement” rather than a "lease,” the ambiguous "additional insured” endorsement should be construed to encompass the actual contractual relationship between plaintiff and Guardian, since any other interpretation would render the extra coverage Guardian purchased nugatory.
So construed, the endorsement gave plaintiff at least a right to an insurer-sponsored defense in the action that was brought against it for injuries sustained by a pedestrian who allegedly tripped and fell on the sidewalk outside its building. The part of the sidewalk where the alleged accident occurred was necessarily used for access in and out of the garage Guardian operated and was thus, by implication, "part of the * * * premises” that Guardian was licensed to use under the parties’ agreement. Consequently, the claim arose out of "the ownership, maintenance [or] use of’ the garage. Accordingly, the allegations in the complaint fell within the risk covered by the policy and defendant insurer was obligated to defend plaintiff in the pending action.
Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Titone, Smith, Levine, Ciparick and Wesley concur in memorandum; Judge Bellacosa taking no part.
Order affirmed, etc.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.