Ribowsky v. Allstate Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ribowsky v. Allstate Insurance

251 A.D.2d 484, 673 N.Y.S.2d 919, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6891

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

DecidedJune 15, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 251 A.D.2d 484 (Ribowsky v. Allstate 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

Ribowsky v. Allstate Insurance, 251 A.D.2d 484, 673 N.Y.S.2d 919, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6891 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries under the supplementary uninsured motorist coverage of an insurance policy issued by the defendant, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lonschein, J.), dated October 15, 1997, which granted the defendant’s motion to compel the plaintiff to accept the defendant’s untimely answer.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in granting the defendant’s motion to compel the plaintiff to accept an untimely answer. The delay on the part of the defendant was relatively brief and the excuse for the delay was reasonable (see, CPLR 3012 [d]). Rosenblatt, J. P., Sullivan, Joy, Altman and Luciano, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries under the supplementary uninsured motorist coverage of an insurance policy issued by the defendant, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lonschein, J.), dated October 15, 1997, which granted the defendant’s motion to compel the plaintiff to accept the defendant’s untimely answer.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in granting the defendant’s motion to compel the plaintiff to accept an untimely answer. The delay on the part of the defendant was relatively brief and the excuse for the delay was reasonable (see, CPLR 3012 [d]). Rosenblatt, J. P., Sullivan, Joy, Altman and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

251 A.D.2d 484, 673 N.Y.S.2d 919, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6891, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ribowsky-v-allstate-insurance-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack