Cortes v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.
This text of 14 Misc. 2d 1062 (Cortes v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Notice of the accident to the insurance broker was not notice to the insurance carrier, defendant here. (See [1063]*1063Allen v. German American Ins. Co., 123 N. Y. 6.) The insurance policy defendant issued to Alvarez, its insured, required written notice of an accident to he given to the company as soon as practicable. Since the record fails to disclose a reasonable explanation or an adequate excuse, a delay of 58 days before written notice was given defendant is untimely and unreasonable as a matter of law, and not a fulfillment of the condition of the policy. (See Vanderbilt v. Indemnity Ins. Co., 265 App. Div. 495.)
The judgment should be reversed, with $30 costs, and judgment directed in favor of defendant dismissing the complaint on the merits, with costs.
Concur — Hoestadter, J. P., Aurelio and Tilzer, JJ.
Judgment reversed, etc.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
14 Misc. 2d 1062, 180 N.Y.S.2d 102, 1958 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2401, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cortes-v-hartford-accident-indemnity-co-nyappterm-1958.