LPGM
Partner

Yale Glazer

Practice Areas:

Insurance, Commercial Litigation

(212) 784-3291

Mr. Glazer, a former prosecutor, has extensive litigation and trial experience. Mr. Glazer’s practice has focused of late on first-party insurance coverage matters, including pre-litigation examinations under oath, working with experts and adjustors in assessing losses, evaluating coverage, and defending matters through resolution. He also has extensive experience in all types of third-party insurance coverage and litigates regularly in the Federal and State trial and appellate courts of New York and New Jersey. He also handles a diverse section of commercial litigation for his clients. Mr. Glazer has lectured before the New York State Bar Association’s Continuing Legal Education Program, and authored articles on various coverage issues. He has been selected for his professional achievements on the New York Super Lawyer list continuously since 2010.

Representative Matters

  • Successfully moved to dismiss an insured’s coverage claim in connection with an underlying patent infringement case based on the policy’s intellectual property exclusion. Tzumi Electronics LLC v. The Burlington Ins. Co., No. 22 CV 10307 (JMF), 2023 WL 4931656 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 2, 2023).
  • Obtained Appellate Division affirmance of summary judgment dismissing an insured’s property suit based on a breach of the policy’s conditions, rejecting policyholder’s substantial compliance argument. MDRN Intelligence Living Wolfhome v. The Harford Fin. Svcs., Inc., 216 A.D.3d 409, 189 N.Y.S.3d 89 (1st Dep’t 2023).
  • Summary judgment was granted against broker/agent for amount insurer paid in settlement to insured based upon broker/agent’s misrepresentations resulting in insurer’s removal of protective safeguard endorsement after loss had occurred. 282 Mountainview Drive LLC v. NorGUARD Ins. Co., 19 CV 2048 (CS), 2021 WL 3037450 (S.D.N.Y. July 14, 2021).
  • Established that even if insurer’s cancellation was improper due to lack of documents from premium finance company, policyholder was not entitled to unlimited renewals so as to cover claimed loss which was greater than the balance of the cancelled policy plus one additional policy term. House v. Hartford Cas. Ins. Co., 189 A.D.3d 1556, 138 N.Y.S.3d 612 (2d Dep’t 2020).
  • Obtained summary judgment rejecting insured’s interpretation of the period of restoration and claim for extended business income where the insured never restored operations post-loss. Milk Indus. Mgm’t Corp. v. Travelers Indem. Co. of Am., 337 F. Supp. 3d 423 (D.N.J. 2018).
  • Second Circuit affirmed dismissal of claims against insurer based on expiration of policy’s suit limitations period. Classic Laundry and Linen Corp. v. Travelers Cas. Ins. Co. of Am., 739 Fed. Appx. 41 (2d Cir. 2018).

 

American Bar Association
New York State Bar Association
New York
New Jersey
United States District Courts for the Southern District of New York
United States District Courts for the Eastern District of New York
United States District Courts for the Western District of New York
United States District Courts for the Northern District of New York
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Hofstra University School of Law (JD, Notes and Comments Editor, Hofstra Law Review, 1997)
University of Delaware (BA , magna cum laude, 1994)