NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

PER CURIAM.

As directed by the Supreme Court in its summary remand order of May 19, 2017, we have reviewed our earlier unreported decision in this matter, Haskell Properties, LLC v. The American Insurance Company, Docket No. A-1452-14 (App. Div. August 4, 2016), in light of the Court's decision in Givaudan Fragrances Corporation v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Company, 227 N.J. 322 (2017).

In our earlier opinion, we relied upon the principles enunciated by this court in Givaudan Fragrances Corporation v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Company, 442 N.J.Super. 28 (App. Div. 2015), in holding plaintiff's complaint in this matter sufficiently stated a cause of action against defendants that refused "to provide coverage for losses originating from occurrences that predated" the assignment in this action as set forth in the subject asset purchase agreement. Haskell Properties, LLC, supra, slip op. at 19. Those principles were affirmed by the Court in Givaudan Fragrance Corporation, supra, 227 N.J. at 327 (holding "once an insured loss has occurred, an anti-assignment clause in an occurrence policy may not provide a basis for an insurer's declination of coverage based on the insured's assignment of the right to invoke policy coverage for that loss").

Accordingly, we are satisfied our application of those principles is entirely consistent with the Supreme Court's decision. We do not discern a reason to alter our original opinion.

Affirmed in part; reversed and remanded in part. We do not retain jurisdiction.