Opinion
214 A.D.2d 447 625 N.Y.S.2d 200 In the Matter of Liquidation of HORIZON INSURANCE COMPANY. Joanne WALSH, Claimant-Appellant, v. Stephen DOODY, Esq., etc., Respondent-Respondent. Supreme Court of New York, First Department April 20, 1995.
G.G. Spencer, Jr., for claimant-appellant.
H. Rubin, for respondent-respondent.
Before SULLIVAN, J.P., and ROSENBERGER, ELLERIN, ROSS and WILLIAMS, JJ.
MEMORANDUM DECISION. Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Carmen Beauchamp Ciparick, J.), entered on or about December 30, 1993, which denied the claimant's motion to disaffirm the report of the Referee disallowing her claim for Security Fund coverage, and granted the respondent's motion to confirm said report, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
The trial court properly accepted the Referee's conclusion that the claimant's notice of her claim to Ambassador Insurance Company was not effective as against Horizon Insurance Company. While the record shows that the two companies were related, they were in fact separate entities and there is no evidence that Ambassador Insurance Co. ever acted as a duly authorized agent of Horizon Insurance Co. (see, D.C.G. Trucking Corp. v. Zurich Ins. Co., 81 A.D.2d 990, 991, 440 N.Y.S.2d 74, lv. denied 54 N.Y.2d 605, 443 N.Y.S.2d 1027, 427 N.E.2d 512). Consequently, the Superintendent as liquidator of Horizon Insurance Co. could not have received timely notice and properly disclaimed coverage. Moreover, the Referee properly concluded that the claim against Horizon Insurance Co. assigned to Ms. Walsh by Brookhaven Hospital was actually a claim for contribution and not indemnification. It was therefore barred by General Obligations Law § 15-108(c) (see, Glaser v. Fortunoff of Westbury Corp., 71 N.Y.2d 643, 645-647, 529 N.Y.S.2d 59, 524 N.E.2d 413). Having concluded that the Referee reached the proper result based upon these two issues we decline to reach the other arguments raised by the claimant-appellant.