Glen Cove Mutual Insurance v. Hall

244 A.D. 869

This text of 244 A.D. 869 (Glen Cove Mutual Insurance v. Hall) 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
Glen Cove Mutual Insurance v. Hall, 244 A.D. 869 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1935).

Opinion

Appeal by plaintiff from a judgment, entered on the verdict of a jury in favor of defendants, at a Trial Term of Supreme Court, Montgomery county, and from an order denying a new trial. Plaintiff sued its agents, the defendants, for negligence in failing to obey its instructions relative to the cancellation of a fire insurance policy, which had been issued by defendants in behalf of plaintiff as insurer. Upon learning of the issuance of the policy, plaintiff wrote to defendants to “ pick up the policies immediately for cancellation.” The defendants claim they attempted to pick up the policies, but were unsuccessful. A fire destroyed the insured property, and plaintiff, after paying the loss under the policy, brought this suit. The general printed instructions of plaintiff to its agents required that “ when Home Office * * * requests cancellation of a [870]*870policy, the request must be complied with immediately by the Agent. Regardless of a difference of opinion the cancellation must be completed. 3. Provided the Agent does not comply with request for cancellation or advise company within ten (10) days from the day said request is made, cancellation will be made direct to the assured from the Home Office by registered mail.” Defendants claim that when they received the letter they understood it to mean that they were simply to go to the insured and secure physical possession of the policies and return them to the company; and that the formal cancellation, if any, was to be made and notice thereof would be sent from the home office. The trial justice charged that it was a question of fact whether this was a reasonable interpretation of the letter, and whether defendants acted with reasonable care, No exception to the charge was taken on behalf of plaintiff, and no request to charge was made. Judgment and order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Hill, P. J., Rhodes, MeNam.ee, Grapser and Heffernan, JJ.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
244 A.D. 869, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/glen-cove-mutual-insurance-v-hall-nyappdiv-1935.