ORTIZ v. The Travelers, Defendant-Respondent. (1999)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Vincent ORTIZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY, et al., Defendants, The Travelers, Defendant-Respondent.

Decided: December 07, 1999

ROSENBERGER, J.P., WILLIAMS, TOM, MAZZARELLI and SAXE, JJ.

Robert M. Ginsberg, for Plaintiff-Appellant. Wayne M. Rubin, for Defendant-Respondent.

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lucindo Suarez, J.), entered on or about January 20, 1999, which, in an action for, inter alia, a declaration that plaintiff is covered under the under insured provisions of Hector Marquez's automobile policy, granted defendant insurer's motion for summary judgment declaring that plaintiff is not so covered, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The supplementary uninsured motorist clause in issue covers the named insured and “while residents of the same household, [the named insured's] spouse and ․ relatives․” Even if the word “spouse” could be understood to include same-sex partners living together in a spousal-type relationship, plaintiff fails to raise an issue of fact as to whether such was the nature of his relationship with the named insured (cf., 390 W. End Assocs. v. Wildfoerster, 241 A.D.2d 402, 661 N.Y.S.2d 202). We also reject plaintiff's argument that he qualifies under the portion of the clause covering “relatives”, given the structure of the clause and the sexual aspect of the relationship.

MEMORANDUM DECISION.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network