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.
Anthony SCALIA, Respondent, v. EQUITABLE LIFE ASSURANCE SOCIETY OF the UNITED STATES, Appellant, et al., Defendant.
In an action to obtain disability benefits pursuant to a disability income insurance policy, the defendant Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Hall, J.), dated September 22, 1997, as dismissed its third defense and its first and second counterclaims.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The record supports the Supreme Court's determination that the defendant Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States (hereinafter Equitable) waived its right to rescind the disability income insurance policy, by continuing to accept premium payments after it gained sufficient knowledge of the alleged misrepresentations upon which it claims to have relied when issuing the policy. It is well settled that the continued acceptance of premiums by the carrier after learning of facts which allow for rescission of the policy, constitutes a waiver of, or more properly an estoppel against, the right to rescind (see, Bible v. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co., 256 N.Y. 458, 462, 176 N.E. 838; Hydell v. North Atl. Life Ins. Co., 246 A.D.2d 511, 667 N.Y.S.2d 391; Continental Ins. Co. v. Helmsley Enters., 211 A.D.2d 589, 622 N.Y.S.2d 20; Weiner v. Government Employees Ins. Co. of Washington, D.C., 52 A.D.2d 844, 845, 382 N.Y.S.2d 814). Equitable's “claimed attempt to both accept premiums and reserve its right to rescind is unenforceable for lack of mutuality and timeliness” (Continental Ins. Co. v. Helmsley Enters., supra, at 589, 622 N.Y.S.2d 20).
We have considered the parties' remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
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: June 01, 1998
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)