A woman was injured when a golf cart in which she was riding overturned on a golf course. She and her husband sued the golf course and a company from which the course leased golf carts, including the one involved in the accident, for use by players. The only allegation in the complaint against the course was that it "....negligently and carelessly maintained the cart path along the 18th hole and the area adjacent thereto in a dangerous, hazardous and unsafe condition...."

The course was identified as an additional insured in a leased golf cart liability policy, carried by the cart owner, in which the insured hazard was described as "golfmobiles."

The insurer provided defense and indemnification for the owner, but denied coverage to the golf course. Thereupon, the course's general liability insurer defended its insured and, later, brought an action against the owner's insurer to recover costs of defense and the portion of the settlement paid in behalf of the course. It appealed from a judgment that it was not entitled to indemnification.

The appeal court determined, from the language of the owner's liability policy, that it provided coverage for the operation and maintenance of golf carts. As the negligence complaint against the golf course related to a "dangerous, hazardous and unsafe condition" in the cart path and nearby areas, it concluded that the owner's policy did not provide coverage for the golf course with respect to the lawsuit in which it was named. Accordingly, the insurer of the golf course was not entitled to indemnification from the insurer of the golf cart owner.

The order of the New York Supreme Court was affirmed by its appellate division.

(MONTAMMY GOLF CLUB ET AL, Appellants v. BRUEDAN CORP., Respondents. New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Judicial Department. No. 70993. December 1, 1994. CCH 1995 Fire and Casualty Cases, Paragraph 5109.)