Avondale Industries, Inc. v. Travelers Indemnity Co.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “a policy delivered to a New Jersey corporation to insure against a loss occurring ‘anywhere’ should be subject to the law of [New Jersey]”
• holding that a court may consider evidence extrinsic to the underlying complaint in a coverage action where it is collateral to the underlying action
• holding that a court may consider extrinsic evidence to the underlying complaint in a coverage action where it is collateral to the underlying action
• stating that, where the insured’s interests include a “wide geographical] range,” New York courts have applied the law of the state where the policies were executed, issued and brokered, and where the insured had its principal place of business.
• under New York choice of law analysis, applying law of state where policies were executed, issued, and brokered and where insureds maintained principal place of business
• The “duty to defend continues until judicial determination, either in [the] underlying action or in [the] coverage action, of [the] issue relevant to coverage.” (alterations in original and citations omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).