Galligan v. Royal Globe Insurance

119 A.D.2d 987, 500 N.Y.S.2d 993, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55917
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 4, 1986·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

— Order unanimously modified, on the law, to grant defendant’s motion for summary judgment and, as modified, affirmed, without costs. Memorandum: The court erred in failing to grant summary judgment to defendant based on proof that the limitation period in the insurance policy had expired before plaintiff commenced this action. Plaintiff commenced this action. Plaintiff failed to submit proof in admissible form sufficient to raise a factual issue that either estoppel or waiver prevented defendant from relying on the limitation provision (Friends of Animals v Associated Fur Mfrs., 46 NY2d 1065, 1067-1068; cf. Blitman Constr. Corp. v Insurance Co. of N. Am., 66 NY2d 820, 822). (Appeals from order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Rath, J. — summary judgment.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Den-man, Boomer, Pine and Schnepp, JJ.

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

Galligan v. Royal Globe Insurance, 119 A.D.2d 987, 500 N.Y.S.2d 993, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55917 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

119 A.D.2d 987 (Galligan v. Royal Globe Insurance) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ilic v. Peerless Insurance
175 Misc. 2d 947 (New York Supreme Court, 1998)
Benatovich v. Propis Agency, Inc.
224 A.D.2d 998 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)