Public Service Mutual Insurance v. 66 Overlook Terrace Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Public Service Mutual Insurance v. 66 Overlook Terrace Corp.

209 A.D.2d 343, 619 N.Y.S.2d 18

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

DecidedNovember 22, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 209 A.D.2d 343 (Public Service Mutual Insurance v. 66 Overlook Terrace Corp.) 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

Public Service Mutual Insurance v. 66 Overlook Terrace Corp., 209 A.D.2d 343, 619 N.Y.S.2d 18 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Tompkins, J.), entered November 12, 1993, which, in consolidated actions seeking, inter alia, declarations as to the party insurers’ obligations to defend and indemnify the party insured, inter alia, declared that Greater New York Mutual Insurance Company, Massachusetts Bay Insurance Company and Hanover Insurance Company are obligated to defend and indemnify, and that Public Service Mutual Insurance Company is not obligated to defend and indemnify, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The IAS Court correctly determined that while the insured failed to give timely notice of the tort plaintiff’s potential claim—even if the insured’s Board of Directors was not made aware of the tort plaintiff’s complaints concerning its employee until mid-March 1988—it remains that the insured did not notify any of the insurers until it received a summons and complaint some 15 months later, nearly two years after the tort plaintiff allegedly first complained (see, Mighty Midgets v Centennial Ins. Co., 47 NY2d 12, 19-20). Greater New York, Massachusetts Bay and Hanover should be estopped from disclaiming coverage because of their unreasonable delay in notifying the insured of their disclaimers (see, Hartford Ins. Co. v County of Nassau, 46 NY2d 1028). Their reservation of rights, with a consequent delay of more than a year, has no relevance to the question of whether timely notice of disclaimer of liability or denial of coverage was given (supra). In the context of these consolidated actions, the award of attorneys’ fees and expenses to the insured was proper (see, Mighty Midgets v Centennial Ins. Co., supra, at 21). We have considered appellants’ contentions that the occurrence and injuries are not covered under their respective policies and find them to be without merit. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin, Kupferman and Williams, JJ.

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

—Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Tompkins, J.), entered November 12, 1993, which, in consolidated actions seeking, inter alia, declarations as to the party insurers’ obligations to defend and indemnify the party insured, inter alia, declared that Greater New York Mutual Insurance Company, Massachusetts Bay Insurance Company and Hanover Insurance Company are obligated to defend and indemnify, and that Public Service Mutual Insurance Company is not obligated to defend and indemnify, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The IAS Court correctly determined that while the insured failed to give timely notice of the tort plaintiff’s potential claim—even if the insured’s Board of Directors was not made aware of the tort plaintiff’s complaints concerning its employee until mid-March 1988—it remains that the insured did not notify any of the insurers until it received a summons and complaint some 15 months later, nearly two years after the tort plaintiff allegedly first complained (see, Mighty Midgets v Centennial Ins. Co., 47 NY2d 12, 19-20). Greater New York, Massachusetts Bay and Hanover should be estopped from disclaiming coverage because of their unreasonable delay in notifying the insured of their disclaimers (see, Hartford Ins. Co. v County of Nassau, 46 NY2d 1028). Their reservation of rights, with a consequent delay of more than a year, has no relevance to the question of whether timely notice of disclaimer of liability or denial of coverage was given (supra). In the context of these consolidated actions, the award of attorneys’ fees and expenses to the insured was proper (see, Mighty Midgets v Centennial Ins. Co., supra, at 21). We have considered appellants’ contentions that the occurrence and injuries are not covered under their respective policies and find them to be without merit. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Ellerin, Kupferman and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

209 A.D.2d 343, 619 N.Y.S.2d 18, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/public-service-mutual-insurance-v-66-overlook-terrace-corp-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack