Smith v. Maryland Casualty Co.

144 A.D.2d 940, 535 N.Y.S.2d 566, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14405

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: We affirm for reasons stated at Special Term, Rath, J. We add only that plaintiff failed to give timely notice of her intention to rely on statutes of the Province of Ontario by referring to them for the first time in a reply brief (see, CPLR 4511 [b]). (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Rath, J. — declaratory judgment.) Present —Doerr, J. P., Boomer, Pine, Balio and Davis, JJ.

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

Smith v. Maryland Casualty Co., 144 A.D.2d 940, 535 N.Y.S.2d 566, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14405 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

144 A.D.2d 940 (Smith v. Maryland Casualty Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.