Frey v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Frey v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp.

11 A.D.2d 693, 204 N.Y.S.2d 959, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9456

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

DecidedJune 6, 1960

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 11 A.D.2d 693 (Frey 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

Frey v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp., 11 A.D.2d 693, 204 N.Y.S.2d 959, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9456 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Applicant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered September 1, 1959, denying her motion for leave to file an affidavit (amounting to a notice of intention to file claim) with the Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation, pursuant to the provisions of subdivision (e) of section 608 of the Insurance Law. Order reversed on the law and the facts and application granted, with costs. Findings of fact insofar as they may be inconsistent herewith are reversed, and new findings are made as indicated herein. In our opinion, the grounds upon which the application is based come within the provisions of section 608 of the Insurance Law. The notice of intention to file claim was filed only 17 days after the expiration of the statutory 90-day period; no prejudice is shown or claimed due to such late filing; and the statute had been enacted very recently. Under all the circumstances, we think the short delay may reasonably be attributed to appellant’s infancy and, in a proper exercise of discretion, the motion should have been granted. (Cf. Natoli v. Board of Educ. of City of Norwich, 277 App. Div. 915, affd. 303 N. Y. 646; Biancoviso V. City of New York, 285 App. Div. 320.) Nolan, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.

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

Applicant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered September 1, 1959, denying her motion for leave to file an affidavit (amounting to a notice of intention to file claim) with the Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation, pursuant to the provisions of subdivision (e) of section 608 of the Insurance Law. Order reversed on the law and the facts and application granted, with costs. Findings of fact insofar as they may be inconsistent herewith are reversed, and new findings are made as indicated herein. In our opinion, the grounds upon which the application is based come within the provisions of section 608 of the Insurance Law. The notice of intention to file claim was filed only 17 days after the expiration of the statutory 90-day period; no prejudice is shown or claimed due to such late filing; and the statute had been enacted very recently. Under all the circumstances, we think the short delay may reasonably be attributed to appellant’s infancy and, in a proper exercise of discretion, the motion should have been granted. (Cf. Natoli v. Board of Educ. of City of Norwich, 277 App. Div. 915, affd. 303 N. Y. 646; Biancoviso V. City of New York, 285 App. Div. 320.) Nolan, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Pette and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 A.D.2d 693, 204 N.Y.S.2d 959, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9456, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frey-v-motor-vehicle-accident-indemnification-corp-nyappdiv-1960.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack