Kramer v. Interboro Mutual Indemnity Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kramer v. Interboro Mutual Indemnity Insurance

150 A.D.2d 530, 543 N.Y.S.2d 265, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6957

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

DecidedMay 15, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 150 A.D.2d 530 (Kramer v. Interboro Mutual Indemnity 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

Kramer v. Interboro Mutual Indemnity Insurance, 150 A.D.2d 530, 543 N.Y.S.2d 265, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6957 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, for a judgment declaring the rights of the parties under an insurance contract issued by the defendant Interboro Mutual Indemnity Insurance Company, the defendant insurance company appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Pitaro, J.), dated February 11, 1988, as denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The record before us raises triable questions of fact concerning whether the plaintiffs failed to comply with the notice provisions of the insurance policy issued by the defendant Interboro Mutual Indemnity Insurance Company and whether the plaintiffs’ 14-month delay in giving notice of the accident was reasonable under the circumstances (see, Security Mut. Ins. Co. v Acker-Fitzsimons Corp., 31 NY2d 436, 441; cf., [531]*531Eveready Ins. Co. v Levine, 145 AD2d 526). Lawrence, J. P., Harwood, Balletta and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, for a judgment declaring the rights of the parties under an insurance contract issued by the defendant Interboro Mutual Indemnity Insurance Company, the defendant insurance company appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Pitaro, J.), dated February 11, 1988, as denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The record before us raises triable questions of fact concerning whether the plaintiffs failed to comply with the notice provisions of the insurance policy issued by the defendant Interboro Mutual Indemnity Insurance Company and whether the plaintiffs’ 14-month delay in giving notice of the accident was reasonable under the circumstances (see, Security Mut. Ins. Co. v Acker-Fitzsimons Corp., 31 NY2d 436, 441; cf., [531]*531Eveready Ins. Co. v Levine, 145 AD2d 526). Lawrence, J. P., Harwood, Balletta and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

150 A.D.2d 530, 543 N.Y.S.2d 265, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6957, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kramer-v-interboro-mutual-indemnity-insurance-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack