From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

AIU Insurance v. Mensah

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 4, 2003
307 A.D.2d 921 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2002-07233

Submitted June 13, 2003.

August 4, 2003.

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to permanently stay arbitration of a claim for uninsured motorist benefits, Utica Mutual Insurance Company appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Thomas, J.), dated April 29, 2002, which granted the petition and permanently stayed arbitration.

Morris, Duffy, Alonso Faley, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Andrea M. Alonso and Pauline E. Glaser of counsel), for appellant.

Samuel K. Rubin, Bethpage, N.Y. (Lawrence R. Miles of counsel), for petitioner-respondent.

Before: FRED T. SANTUCCI, J.P., LEO F. McGINITY, SANDRA L. TOWNES, WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.

Pursuant to the provisions of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 313 in effect at the time of the purported cancellation of a policy of insurance providing coverage to Kazimierz Kreft ( see Vehicle and Traffic Law § 313[a]; [3]), Utica Mutual Insurance Company (hereinafter Utica) was required to file a notice of cancellation with the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles. The record provides no proof that Utica complied with this provision, and thus, the termination of coverage by Utica was ineffective with respect to the claim made by Jennifer Mensah arising out of an automobile accident which occurred on October 22, 2000 ( see Vehicle and Traffic Law § 313[a]; Matter of Merchants Bus. Men's Mut. Ins. Co. v. Williams, 295 A.D.2d 614, 615; Matter of Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Bethel, 207 A.D.2d 449). Furthermore, an ineffective notice of cancellation will cause the policy to continue in force after its stated expiration date ( see Matter of American Home Assur. Co. v. Chin, 269 A.D.2d 24). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the petition to stay arbitration pursuant to the uninsured motorist provision of the policy issued by the petitioner, AIU Insurance Company ( see Matter of Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. v. Bethel, supra).

SANTUCCI, J.P., McGINITY, TOWNES and MASTRO, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

AIU Insurance v. Mensah

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Aug 4, 2003
307 A.D.2d 921 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

AIU Insurance v. Mensah

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF AIU INSURANCE COMPANY, petitioner-respondent, v. JENNIFER…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Aug 4, 2003

Citations

307 A.D.2d 921 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
762 N.Y.S.2d 898

Citing Cases

In the Matter of Progressive N. Ins. v. White

Vehicle and Traffic Law § 313 governs the procedures which an insurance carrier must follow in order to…

In re Chubb Group of Ins Companies v. Williams

Pursuant to the provision of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 313 in effect at the time of the purported…