Nagel v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Nagel v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance

51 A.D.2d 1022, 381 N.Y.S.2d 124, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11805

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

DecidedMarch 15, 1976

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 51 A.D.2d 1022 (Nagel v. State Farm Mutual Automobile 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

Nagel v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance, 51 A.D.2d 1022, 381 N.Y.S.2d 124, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11805 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action inter alia for a judgment declaring that a certain policy of insurance issued by defendant to plaintiff was in effect on August 22, 1973, the date of an automobile accident involving the plaintiff, she appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered March 27, 1975, which, after a nonjury trial, declared that defendant had effectively terminated the policy prior to the date of the accident. Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, with costs, and it is declared that the subject policy of insurance issued by defendant to plaintiff was in full force and effect on August 22, 1973 and that plaintiff is entitled to full protection under said policy. The essential issue raised on this appeal is whether defendant met its burden of proof as to the mailing of a notice of cancellation for nonpayment of a premium to plaintiff. Upon all of the evidence adduced at the trial we conclude that the proof was insufficient to establish that the notice had been sent and that Trial Term’s finding to the contrary was against the weight of the evidence (see Capra v Lumbermen’s Mut. Cas. Co., 43 AD2d 986). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Margett, Rabin, Shapiro and Hawkins, 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 that a certain policy of insurance issued by defendant to plaintiff was in effect on August 22, 1973, the date of an automobile accident involving the plaintiff, she appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, entered March 27, 1975, which, after a nonjury trial, declared that defendant had effectively terminated the policy prior to the date of the accident. Judgment reversed, on the law and the facts, with costs, and it is declared that the subject policy of insurance issued by defendant to plaintiff was in full force and effect on August 22, 1973 and that plaintiff is entitled to full protection under said policy. The essential issue raised on this appeal is whether defendant met its burden of proof as to the mailing of a notice of cancellation for nonpayment of a premium to plaintiff. Upon all of the evidence adduced at the trial we conclude that the proof was insufficient to establish that the notice had been sent and that Trial Term’s finding to the contrary was against the weight of the evidence (see Capra v Lumbermen’s Mut. Cas. Co., 43 AD2d 986). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Margett, Rabin, Shapiro and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

51 A.D.2d 1022, 381 N.Y.S.2d 124, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11805, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nagel-v-state-farm-mutual-automobile-insurance-nyappdiv-1976.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack