Opinion
April 28, 1992
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (David B. Saxe, J.).
Defendants failed to satisfy the notice requirement in the insurance policy to forward to the insurer all legal process, thus vitiating the policy. (Security Mut. Ins. Co. v Acker-Fitzsimons Corp., 31 N.Y.2d 436, 440.) While the insurer was initially notified of the accident and conducted an investigation, the failure to promptly forward the legal process caused the insurer irreparable harm by depriving it of the opportunity to participate meaningfully in pretrial discovery proceedings (Hovdestad v Interboro Mut. Indem. Ins. Co., 135 A.D.2d 783, 784).
Plaintiff presented a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment, including the legal liability of the tenant and the out-of-possession landlord (see, Administrative Code of City of New York §§ 27-127, 27-128, 27-532 [a] [7] [g]; Guzman v Haven Plaza Hous. Dev. Fund Co., 69 N.Y.2d 559). As defendant Catsimatidis failed to assemble and lay bare affirmative proof of the existence of any issue of fact, summary judgment was properly granted on the issue of liability (see, Stainless, Inc. v Employers Fire Ins. Co., 69 A.D.2d 27, 32, affd 49 N.Y.2d 924).
Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Carro, Kupferman, Kassal and Smith, JJ.