Vincent Passarelli

Won summary judgment resulting in a declaration that the defendant insurer was obligated to indemnify our client $8.95 million for a settlement payment made on behalf of its insured in an underlying construction accident lawsuit. In granting summary judgment, the court held that our client's insured (a tenant) qualified as an "additional insured" under the primary and excess policies that the defendant issued to its own insured (a construction contractor) pursuant to the contract between the parties, and the plaintiff’s accident in the underlying action triggered coverage for our client's insured. The court also rejected defendant’s argument that its policy’s exclusion precluded coverage to the client.

Secured dismissal at the district court level, and affirmation on appeal, of a pro se plaintiff's claims against our insurance company stemming from his conviction for grand larceny and embezzlement for stealing from his former employer. Our client paid the employer's loss and then succeeded in a $1 million subrogation action against the plaintiff, which he alleged constituted a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 violation by conspiring with the government defendants to wrongfully prosecute him. In affirming the district court's dismissal of the claims, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit agreed with our argument that the plaintiff failed to show that the insurer “acted under color of state law” as is required under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Further, the Court affirmed the district court's decision not to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the plaintiff’s state law claim that the decision in the subrogation action was improper.

Obtained dismissal of a coverage action stemming from the plaintiff being shot in the head with a nail gun while performing work for the insured, which had been retained by a contractor to perform the work. When the plaintiff sued the contractor for negligence and under New York Labor Law, the contractor filed a Third-Party Complaint seeking defense and indemnity from our client as an additional insured. In granting the motion to dismiss, the court accepted our argument that the policy's Employer's Liability Exclusion and Independent Contractors/Subcontractors Exclusion applied and rejected the contractor’s argument that the injury did not "arise out of" his employment because it resulted from a fight between employees. 

Defeated the plaintiff's motion to transfer venue and successfully moved to compel arbitration -- and secured affirmance of these rulings on appeal in the New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division -- in a breach of contract action case that potentially involved multiple and diverse causes of action centered on the client's refusal to issue a refund for the price of airline tickets.

Secured dismissal of claims brought against the insurer where the insureds alleged that denial of coverage for a floating dock and gangway that allegedly went missing from their waterfront property constituted a breach of the homeowner's insurance policy. Plaintiffs, seeking in excess of $4 million in damages, further alleged that the insurer acted in bad faith during the claim investigation. In granting summary judgment and dismissing the claims, the court agreed with the insurer's argument that Plaintiffs' failure to provide a signed Sworn Statement in Proof of Loss pursuant to the clear and unambiguous terms of the policy was a complete bar to coverage and that Plaintiffs failed to show that the insurer acted in bad faith during the claim investigation.