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: TRI-STATE CONSUMER INSURANCE COMPANY, appellant, v. Daniel FURBOTER, respondent.
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75, inter alia, to permanently stay arbitration of an underinsured motorist claim, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Woodard, J.), entered April 13, 2009, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding on the merits.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the petitioner's contention, the Supreme Court properly denied its petition to permanently stay the arbitration of the respondent's underinsured motorist benefits claim on the ground of late notice. In determining whether notice was given in a timely fashion, the court must consider the particular circumstances of the case, including, inter alia, the latency, nature, and seriousness of the insured's injuries (see Matter of Metropolitan Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Mancuso, 93 N.Y.2d 487, 493, 693 N.Y.S.2d 81, 715 N.E.2d 107; Matter of Progressive Northeastern Ins. Co. v. McBride, 65 A.D.3d 632, 633, 884 N.Y.S.2d 167). In the instant case, the uncontroverted affidavit and medical records of the respondent demonstrated that his delay of some 16 months in notifying the petitioner of his claim for underinsurance benefits was attributable to the belief of his various treating physicians that his injuries were relatively minor and would resolve with treatment. Moreover, the respondent gave notice promptly after he was made aware of the worsening and permanent nature of his injuries (see Matter of Progressive N. Ins. Co. v. Sachs, 50 A.D.3d 803, 804-805, 856 N.Y.S.2d 633; Matter of New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co. [Guarino], 11 A.D.3d 909, 911, 784 N.Y.S.2d 268; Medina v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 303 A.D.2d 987, 757 N.Y.S.2d 178; Matter of Nationwide Ins. Co. [Bellreng], 288 A.D.2d 925, 732 N.Y.S.2d 822; Matter of Nationwide Ins. Enter. [Leavy], 268 A.D.2d 661, 662-663, 700 N.Y.S.2d 582). Accordingly, the respondent complied with his obligation to give notice “[a]s soon as practicable” under the policy.
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: March 02, 2010
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)