Titus v. Travelers Insurance

268 A.D. 802, 49 N.Y.S.2d 203, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3544
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 26, 1944
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 268 A.D. 802 (Titus v. Travelers 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
Titus v. Travelers Insurance, 268 A.D. 802, 49 N.Y.S.2d 203, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3544 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1944).

Opinion

The action is to recover on a policy of accident insurance issued by defendant. There is no dispute as to the material facts. Plaintiff is the widow of the insured and the beneficiary named in the policy. The claimed accident occurred on January 25, 1943, and the insured died on February 10, 1943. Notice of death was given to defendant on June 7 or June 14, 1943. The policy provided that the insurer shall have the right and opportunity to make an autopsy ” and also provided that written notice given within thirty days of any accident shall be deemed sufficient, unless the notice as herein specified may be shown not to have been reasonably possible.” On July 2, 1943, defendant demanded permission to make an autopsy on the body of the insured and plaintiff refused. The failure of plaintiff to comply with the condition precedent, in that she refused to allow the autopsy, bars any recovery under the policy. (Dvorkin v. Commercial Travelers Mut. Accident Assn., 258 App. Div. 501, affd. 283 N. Y. 629; Gould v. Travelers Insurance Co., 244 App. Div. 274, affd. 270 N. Y. 584.) Assuming that plaintiff did not know of the existence of the policy until March 5, 1943, her failure to give notice to the insurer of the claimed accident and death until June 7, 1943, prevents the enforcement of the policy. (MacKay v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 281 N. Y. 42; Walterman v. Mutual Benefit Health & Accident Assn., 260 App. Div. 478.) Order denying defendant’s motion for summary judgment reversed on the law, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion granted, with ten dollars costs. Close, P. J., Johnston, Adel, Lewis and Aldrich, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Saperstein v. Commercial Travelers Mutual Accident Ass'n
42 A.D.2d 487 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1973)
Turner v. Mutual Benefit Health & Accident Ass'n
5 Misc. 2d 524 (New York Supreme Court, 1957)
Cohen v. Guardian Life Insurance
207 Misc. 266 (New York Supreme Court, 1955)
Rogel v. United States
84 F. Supp. 781 (E.D. New York, 1949)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
268 A.D. 802, 49 N.Y.S.2d 203, 1944 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3544, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/titus-v-travelers-insurance-nyappdiv-1944.