158 A.D.2d 661 | N.Y. App. Div. | 1990
The resolution of this case depends upon whether the vehicle being operated by Meier at the time of the accident had been "furnished for the regular use” of Meier. If the automobile had been furnished to Meier for his regular use then, under the terms of the above provisions, it would be excluded from insurance coverage.
As a general rule, "[w]hether a car has been furnished for regular use within the meaning of the exclusionary provision is determined by the particular facts and circumstances in
Having concluded that the vehicle in question was furnished for Meier’s “regular use”, we need not reach the issue of whether Meier was a “relative” of his father, Alfred Meier, within the meaning of the family policies. Lawrence, J. P., Rubin, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.