Weldon v. New York Property Insurance Underwriters Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Weldon v. New York Property Insurance Underwriters Co.

249 A.D.2d 539, 671 N.Y.S.2d 334, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4613

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

DecidedApril 27, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 249 A.D.2d 539 (Weldon v. New York Property Insurance Underwriters Co.) 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

Weldon v. New York Property Insurance Underwriters Co., 249 A.D.2d 539, 671 N.Y.S.2d 334, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4613 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Coppola, J.), entered April 10, 1997, which granted the motion of the defendants Sapperstein, Hochberg and Haberman, Inc., and Michael J. Castellano for summary judgment (1) dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them and (2) on their counterclaim in the principal sum of $4,500.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that the respondents had a duty to inform them of the two-year limitation period contained in the plaintiffs’ insurance policy.

The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are without merit. O’Brien, J. P., Santucci, Altman and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Coppola, J.), entered April 10, 1997, which granted the motion of the defendants Sapperstein, Hochberg and Haberman, Inc., and Michael J. Castellano for summary judgment (1) dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them and (2) on their counterclaim in the principal sum of $4,500.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that the respondents had a duty to inform them of the two-year limitation period contained in the plaintiffs’ insurance policy.

The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are without merit. O’Brien, J. P., Santucci, Altman and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

249 A.D.2d 539, 671 N.Y.S.2d 334, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4613, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/weldon-v-new-york-property-insurance-underwriters-co-nyappdiv-1998.