A New York court has held that coverage is afforded to an additional insured even if coverage would be void as to named insured based upon the named insured’s misrepresentation. In <i>Tocci Building Corp of New Jersey v. Delos Insurance Company</i> (14813/08), Nassau County Justice F. Dana Winslow held that plaintiff, an additional insured under defendant’s policy, was entitled to coverage even though defendant’s named insured made misrepresentations in its application, and defendant would not have issued the policy if it had known about the misrepresentations.
Under New York law, an additional insured is treated as if it had a separate policy of its own. This is true even if the policy was issued based upon a material misrepresentation of the named insured.
If you would like additional information about this post, please contact David Tavella at <a href="mailto:email@example.com">firstname.lastname@example.org</a>.