From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Joseph v. Insureco, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 31, 2006
25 A.D.3d 764 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

2004-08308.

January 31, 2006.

In a hybrid action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, and a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 in the nature of mandamus, to compel the New York State Superintendent of Insurance to require certain insurance companies to settle the plaintiff's insurance claim arising from water damage to his property, the plaintiff appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dollard, J.), dated August 16, 2004, which granted that branch of the cross motion of Insureco, Inc., St. Paul Insurance Company, sued herein as St. Paul Property and Liability Insurance, and United States Fidelity Guaranty Company, sued herein as United States Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc., which was to dismiss the claims insofar as asserted against them as time-barred pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (5), granted that branch of the cross motion of the New York State Insurance Department and the New York State Superintendent of Insurance which was to dismiss the claims insofar as asserted against them as time-barred pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (5), and dismissed the proceeding insofar as asserted against them.

John Joseph, a/k/a George Joseph, Hollis, N.Y., appellant pro se.

Tell, Cheser Breitbart, LLP, New York, N.Y. (William Smith and Shana A. Kleinman of counsel), for respondents Insureco, Inc., St. Paul Insurance Company, s/h/a St. Paul Property and Liability Insurance, and United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, s/h/a United States Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc.

Eliot Spitzer, Attorney-General, New York, N.Y. (Robert H. Easton and Marion R. Buchbinder of counsel), for respondents New York State Insurance Department and New York State Superintendent of Insurance.

Before: Schmidt, J.P., Krausman, Luciano and Covello, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with one bill of costs.

Pursuant to the limitations provisions contained in the insurance policy issued to the plaintiff and the endorsement, his claim against Insureco, Inc., St. Paul Insurance Company, sued herein as St. Paul Property and Liability Insurance, and United States Fidelity Guaranty Company, sued herein as United States Fidelity and Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc., was properly dismissed as time-barred. Parties to a contract may agree to limit the period of time within which an action must be commenced to a shorter period than that provided by the applicable statute of limitations ( see CPLR 201; Matter of Incorporated Vil. of Saltaire v. Zagata, 280 AD2d 547). The claims asserted against the New York State Insurance Department and the New York State Superintendent of Insurance were likewise time-barred ( see CPLR 217).

The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.


Summaries of

Joseph v. Insureco, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 31, 2006
25 A.D.3d 764 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

Joseph v. Insureco, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:JOHN JOSEPH, Also Known as GEORGE JOSEPH, Appellant, v. INSURECO, INC., et…

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

Date published: Jan 31, 2006

Citations

25 A.D.3d 764 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 631
809 N.Y.S.2d 518

Citing Cases

MULVIHILL ELEC. CONTR. v. NAB CONSTR. CORP.

Therefore, contrary to plaintiff's assertions defendant is not now barred from seeking such relief. It is…

Dimmick v. New York Property Ins

The plaintiff, however, failed to commence this action until July 31, 2001, by the filing of a summons with…