SMITH v. << (1997)

Supreme Court erred in determining that an underinsurance offset provision of respondents' insurance policy is unenforceable.   That provision is enforceable because the policy provides a single, combined liability limit for both uninsurance and underinsurance (see, Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. [Stolarz-N. J. Mfrs. Ins. Co.], 81 N.Y.2d 219, 223-224, 597 N.Y.S.2d 904, 613 N.E.2d 936;  cf., Matter of United Community Ins. Co. v. Mucatel, 127 Misc.2d 1045, 487 N.Y.S.2d 959, affd. without opn. 119 A.D.2d 1017, 501 N.Y.S.2d 761, affd. 69 N.Y.2d 777, 513 N.Y.S.2d 114, 505 N.E.2d 624 for the reasons stated at Special Term ).   Thus, respondents, who recovered $10,000 from the tortfeasor's insurer, are entitled to no more than $15,000 in underinsurance coverage from petitioner, not the full $25,000 policy limit (see, Matter of Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. [Hunley], 210 A.D.2d 947, 621 N.Y.S.2d 1019;  see also, Matter of New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co. [McGill], 244 A.D.2d 865, 665 N.Y.S.2d 993 [decided herewith] ).

Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and petition granted.

MEMORANDUM: