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.
IN RE: NEW YORK CENTRAL MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, respondent, v. Licette GONZALEZ, etc., et al., appellants.
In a proceeding, inter alia, to permanently stay arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Whelan, J.), dated April 18, 2005, which granted that branch of the petition which was to permanently stay the arbitration.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The appellants' failure to complete and return a sworn “Notice of Intention to Make Claim” form, which their insurer promptly provided to the appellants' attorney on September 9, 2004, after receiving the attorney's letter dated September 2, 2004, constituted a breach of a condition of coverage under the policy's Supplementary Uninsured/Underinsured Motorists endorsement, providing a basis for disclaimer or denial of coverage (see New York Central Mutual Fire Ins. Co. v. Aguirre, 7 N.Y.3d 772, 820 N.Y.S.2d 848, 854 N.E.2d 146). The insurer's commencement of the instant proceeding on October 5, 2004, following receipt of the appellants' notice of intention to arbitrate on September 16, 2004, constituted timely, sufficient denial of coverage and disclaimer “as soon as reasonably possible” (Insurance Law § 3420[d]; see Matter of American Cas. Ins. Co. v. Silverman, 271 A.D.2d 528, 705 N.Y.S.2d 676; cf. New York Central Mutual Fire Ins. Co. v. Aguirre, supra ), which was 26 days after the “Notice of Intention to Make Claim” form was mailed to the appellants' attorney.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the petition which was to permanently stay the uninsured motorist arbitration.
The appellants' remaining contentions are without merit.
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: November 28, 2006
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)