Bhupsingh v. Country-Wide Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bhupsingh v. Country-Wide Insurance

269 A.D.2d 552, 703 N.Y.S.2d 745, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2127

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedFebruary 28, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 269 A.D.2d 552 (Bhupsingh v. Country-Wide Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bhupsingh v. Country-Wide Insurance, 269 A.D.2d 552, 703 N.Y.S.2d 745, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2127 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of an insurance contract, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dye, J.), dated March 2, 1999, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

The Supreme Court denied the defendant’s motion on the ground that the defendant did not establish its entitlement to summary judgment.

The defendant, however, demonstrated through the affirmed medical reports of its examining physicians that the plaintiff was no longer disabled, and that it was entitled to discontinue her benefits (see, 11 NYCRR 65.15 [g] [2] [ii]). Therefore, the defendant’s motion for summary judgment should have been granted. Ritter, J. P., Sullivan, S. Miller, Luciano and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of an insurance contract, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dye, J.), dated March 2, 1999, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

The Supreme Court denied the defendant’s motion on the ground that the defendant did not establish its entitlement to summary judgment.

The defendant, however, demonstrated through the affirmed medical reports of its examining physicians that the plaintiff was no longer disabled, and that it was entitled to discontinue her benefits (see, 11 NYCRR 65.15 [g] [2] [ii]). Therefore, the defendant’s motion for summary judgment should have been granted. Ritter, J. P., Sullivan, S. Miller, Luciano and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

269 A.D.2d 552, 703 N.Y.S.2d 745, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2127, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bhupsingh-v-country-wide-insurance-nyappdiv-2000.