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: ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, appellant, v. Anthony GARDANER, respondent-respondent, et al., respondent; Travelers Insurance Company, proposed additional respondent-respondent.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75, inter alia, to permanently stay arbitration of a claim for uninsured motorist benefits, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kurtz, J.H.O.), dated March 27, 2007, which, after a framed-issue hearing, denied that branch of the petition which was to permanently stay arbitration and, in effect, directed the parties to proceed to arbitration.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The Supreme Court correctly determined that Travelers Insurance Company (hereinafter Travelers) was justified in disclaiming insurance coverage for its insured because of his failure to cooperate in the defense of an action against him. Under the circumstances of this case, where there was no cooperation by the insured, the insured could not be located after a diligent search, and there had been misrepresentations made by the insured when applying for insurance, there was a breach of the cooperation clause (see Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. Graham, 275 A.D.2d 1012, 1013, 713 N.Y.S.2d 602; Peerless Ins. Co. v. Sears, 34 A.D.2d 725, 312 N.Y.S.2d 347, affd. 29 N.Y.2d 717, 325 N.Y.S.2d 753, 275 N.E.2d 336; Fidelity & Cas. Co. of N.Y. v. Holdeman, 23 A.D.2d 878, 879, 259 N.Y.S.2d 896, affd. 18 N.Y.2d 997, 278 N.Y.S.2d 230, 224 N.E.2d 733). Additionally, inasmuch as the driver of the insured's vehicle supplied the police with a nonexistent address, Travelers' failure to serve a separate disclaimer on the driver did not render the original disclaimer ineffective (see Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. v. Rico, 28 A.D.3d 353, 354, 814 N.Y.S.2d 114).
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 10, 2008
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)