Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
AMERICAN TRANSIT INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. B.O. ASTRA MANAGEMENT CORP., et al., Defendants, Kuok Hang Leong, Defendant-Respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Rolando T. Acosta, J.), entered May 2, 2006, which, inter alia, granted defendant Kuok Hang Leong's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously modified, on the law, to declare that plaintiff insurer is obligated to indemnify its insured in the underlying action, and otherwise affirmed, with costs in favor of defendants.
Having received timely notice of claim, plaintiff insurer was not entitled to disclaim coverage based on untimely notice of the claimant's commencement of litigation unless it was prejudiced by the late notice (see Rekemeyer v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 4 N.Y.3d 468, 476, 796 N.Y.S.2d 13, 828 N.E.2d 970 [2005]; Matter of Brandon [Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co.], 97 N.Y.2d 491, 498, 743 N.Y.S.2d 53, 769 N.E.2d 810 [2002] ), and such prejudice was not shown. The relief afforded defendant claimant Kuok Hang Leong was proper notwithstanding the default of plaintiff's insured. Indeed, in enacting Insurance Law § 3420, the Legislature has made it clear that the right of a claimant to seek recovery of insurance proceeds is not defeated by the insured's failure to perform its claim-related obligations.
We modify only to declare in defendant's favor (see Lanza v. Wagner, 11 N.Y.2d 317, 334, 229 N.Y.S.2d 380, 183 N.E.2d 670 [1962], appeal dismissed 371 U.S. 74, 83 S.Ct. 177, 9 L.Ed.2d 163 [1962], cert. denied 371 U.S. 901, 83 S.Ct. 205, 9 L.Ed.2d 164 [1962] ).
We have considered plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: April 26, 2007
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)