In re the Arbitration between Shehata & Government Employees Insurance

66 A.D.2d 821, 411 N.Y.S.2d 349, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14145
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 18, 1978
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 66 A.D.2d 821 (In re the Arbitration between Shehata & Government Employees Insurance) 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
In re the Arbitration between Shehata & Government Employees Insurance, 66 A.D.2d 821, 411 N.Y.S.2d 349, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14145 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Opinion

In a proceeding, inter alia, to permanently stay arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim, petitioner, the Government Employees Insurance Company, appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, dated March 24, 1978, which denied the application, with leave to renew. Judgment reversed, on the law, with $50 costs and disbursements, and application to permanently stay arbitration granted. On December 14, 1974 the claimant was injured in an automobile accident. Subsequent thereto she retained attorneys who obtained medical and police reports but, for some unexplained reason, never made inquiry to determine whether the other vehicle involved in the accident was insured. In July, 1977 the claimant retained her present attorneys who, on September 6, 1977, were informed that there was no insurance coverage for the other car that was involved in the accident. On September 12, 1977, 33 months after the accident, a notice of claim was served on the petitioner insurer. The claimant did not set forth any reason why the notice of claim was not filed, as required by section 608 of the Insurance Law, within 90 days after the accident or as soon thereafter as practical. We conclude that such notice of claim was, as a matter of law, served untimely (see Matter of Acevedo v MVAIC, 56 AD2d 817 [a delay of seven and one-half months]; Matter of Pasternack v MVAIC, 48 AD2d 837 [a delay of seven and one-half months]; Matter of Becton v MVAIC, 35 AD2d 660, affd 29 NY2d 942 [a delay of nine months]). Mollen, P. J., Latham, Damiani and Titone, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Eveready Insurance v. Saunders
149 A.D.2d 456 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
Nassau Insurance v. Doyle
114 A.D.2d 899 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
66 A.D.2d 821, 411 N.Y.S.2d 349, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14145, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-arbitration-between-shehata-government-employees-insurance-nyappdiv-1978.