Fabian v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp.

111 A.D.2d 366, 489 N.Y.S.2d 581, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 51464
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 28, 1985
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 111 A.D.2d 366 (Fabian v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp.) 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
Fabian v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp., 111 A.D.2d 366, 489 N.Y.S.2d 581, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 51464 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Opinion

Appeal by the [367]*367Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation (MVAIC) from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Held, J.), dated January 6, 1984, which, after a “framed issue” trial, determined a disclaimer of insurance coverage by Allstate Insurance Company (Allstate) was valid.

Judgment reversed, on the law, with costs to MVAIC payable by Allstate, and Allstate’s disclaimer is determined to be invalid.

Allstate, in its letter of disclaimer, failed to assert the alleged noncooperation of its insured. Thus, Allstate cannot now assert that reason as a basis for its disclaimer (General Acc. Ins. Group v Cirucci, 46 NY2d 862, 864).

“Although an insurer may disclaim coverage for a valid reason (Insurance Law § [3420 (d)]) the notice of disclaimer must promptly apprise the claimant with a high degree of specificity of the ground or grounds on which the disclaimer is predicated. Absent such specific notice, a claimant might have difficulty assessing whether the insurer will be able to disclaim successfully. This uncertainty could prejudice the claimant’s ability to ultimately obtain recovery. In addition, the insurer’s responsibility to furnish notice of the specific ground on which the disclaimer is based is not unduly burdensome, the insurer being highly experienced and sophisticated in such matters” (General Acc. Ins. Group v Cirucci, supra, at p 864).

The only ground stated in the disclaimer letter, to wit, the insured’s failure to notify Allstate of the accident, was not effective as against petitioners. As injured third parties, petitioners may seek recovery from an insured’s carrier despite the failure of the insured to provide timely notice of the accident (Insurance Law § 3420 [a] [3]; see, Lauritano v American Fid. Fire Ins. Co., 3 AD2d 564, affd 4 NY2d 1028). While under the facts of this case, a disclaimer might have been made based upon late notice by petitioners themselves, the failure to raise this ground in the disclaimer letter precludes consideration of this ground for disclaiming coverage.

Accordingly, we determine that Allstate’s disclaimer is not valid.

In light of our determination, we need not reach the issue of the timeliness of Allstate’s disclaimer. Mangano, J. P., Gibbons, Niehoff and Lawrence, JJ., concur.

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

Related

New York & Presbyterian Hospital v. Enterprise Rent-A-Car
281 A.D.2d 526 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Mount Sinai Hospital v. Triboro Coach, Inc.
263 A.D.2d 11 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Gonyon v. Transtate Insurance
261 A.D.2d 507 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Richards v. Select Ins. Co., Inc.
40 F. Supp. 2d 163 (S.D. New York, 1999)
Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. National Union Fire Insurance
251 A.D.2d 216 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Unigard Insurance Group v. Bothwell
237 A.D.2d 450 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Haslauer v. North Country Adirondack Cooperative Insurance
237 A.D.2d 673 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Wraight v. Exchange Insurance
234 A.D.2d 916 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
Presbyterian Hospital in City of New York v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
233 A.D.2d 433 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
Hanover Insurance v. Suffolk Overhead Door Co.
207 A.D.2d 428 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
Macon v. Arnlie Realty Co.
207 A.D.2d 268 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)
Dryden Central School District v. Dryden Aquatic Racing Team
195 A.D.2d 790 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1993)
United States Liability Insurance v. Young
186 A.D.2d 644 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
Polak v. City of Schenectady
181 A.D.2d 233 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1992)
Elmuccio v. Allstate Insurance
149 A.D.2d 653 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
Massachusetts Bay Insurance v. Flood
128 A.D.2d 683 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
111 A.D.2d 366, 489 N.Y.S.2d 581, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 51464, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fabian-v-motor-vehicle-accident-indemnification-corp-nyappdiv-1985.