Use and Operation again and again
NY court finds excavator on public highway meets "use and operation" standard for no-fault coverage, even when temporarily parked and unattended during construction work.
Read More →Use and Operation
14 articles by Jason Tenenbaum, Esq.
Use and operation, again
Court case analysis examining "use and operation" coverage when bus driver refused to activate lift device, comparing to Cividanes precedent and questioning the legal distinction.
Read More →
Coverage – use or operation
New York court clarifies that auto insurance coverage extends beyond vehicle operation to include related activities like luggage handling at bus stops.
Read More →
Use and occupation
Important Nakhla case clarifies "use and operation" coverage when person exits vehicle and is struck - affects first-party benefits and SUM coverage priority rules.
Read More →
Another use and operation
Court rules bus passenger's injury from stepping into street hole doesn't qualify for no-fault benefits under "use and operation" standard in NY insurance law.
Read More →
On the motorcycle and hit again – Is there coverage?
Court rules motorcycle passenger thrown from bike but struck by it again remains "occupying" vehicle for no-fault insurance exclusion purposes in complex accident case.
Read More →
The buckling knee when exiting
Court rules knee buckling while exiting vehicle doesn't qualify for NY no-fault benefits - use and operation requirements explained for personal injury claims.
Read More →
Use, Operation and proximate cause liberally construed to afford coverage
New York no-fault insurance coverage expanded through liberal construction of use, operation and proximate cause requirements in rescue injury case.
Read More →
MVAIC failed to disprove that the accident was the cause of the injuries
MVAIC fails to prove motor vehicle accident didn't cause injuries using inadmissible hearsay police report, resulting in summary judgment loss in NY court.
Read More →
Use and Operation
Cividanes v City of New York case analysis examining "use and operation" requirements for no-fault coverage when plaintiff injured exiting bus into pothole.
Read More →
Use and Operation – Should the SUM endorsement be read differently than the no-fault endorsement?
Analysis of use and operation coverage differences between SUM endorsement and no-fault PIP endorsement under New York insurance law.
Read More →
Occupation of a vehicle implicated through rearranging items inside vehicle while standing outside of it
Expert analysis of NY vehicle occupation law. Learn how Rosado v Hartford expanded coverage for delivery workers and commercial vehicle operators. Call 516-750-0595.
Read More →
A person who parks a truck on the side of the road, exits it and directs traffic is not using or operating the truck
Understanding vehicle use and operation in New York auto insurance claims. Expert Long Island lawyers explain the Gallaher v Republic Franklin decision. Call 516-750-0595.
Read More →
Robbing someone while they are chaging a tire is considered use and operation in Florida
Florida Supreme Court ruling expands motor vehicle "use and operation" coverage to include robbery victim changing tire, demonstrating broad interpretation of no-fault benefits.
Read More →