Vargas v. Insurance Company of North America
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
651 F.2d. 838 (2d Cir. 1981)
- Written by Genan Zilkha, JD
Facts
Joseph Khurey obtained an aviation insurance policy from Insurance Company of North America (INA) (defendant) for his airplane. The insurance policy applied “only to occurrences, accidents or losses which happen[ed] . . . within the United States of America, its territories or possessions, Canada or Mexico.” The policy included an endorsement that extended territorial coverage to the Bahama Islands. Khurey and his family were killed in a plane crash 25 miles west of Puerto Rico while flying from Haiti to Puerto Rico. This was the last leg of their overall trip from New York to Puerto Rico. INA declined coverage, claiming that the policy only covered losses occurring in certain defined covered locations, which included the three miles adjacent to the coasts of these locations. The plane crash occurred outside of the covered locations. Daniel Vargas (plaintiff), the personal representative of one of the Khureys, argued that the policy covered losses occurring while the plane was traveling between two covered locations. Vargas brought a declaratory-judgment action to determine whether INA was liable under the insurance policy. The district court granted summary judgment on behalf of INA. Vargas appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Sofaer, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
