From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company v. Gamble

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 26, 1998
250 A.D.2d 540 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

May 26, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Frank Lewis, Spec. Ref.).


The Special Referee correctly held that additional respondent-appellant insurer failed to show that it properly canceled its policy with the owner of the offending vehicle, where its witness had no first-hand knowledge of its having actually mailed either the final bill or a notice of cancellation to the owner of the offending vehicle, or of its regular procedures in mailing such bills and notices ( see, Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. v. Ramirez, 208 A.D.2d 828, 830, citing, inter alia, Federal Ins. Co. v. Kimbrough, 116 A.D.2d 692; Matter of Paramount Ins. Co. v. Moctezuma, 201 A.D.2d 652).

Concur — Milonas, J.P., Nardelli, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.


Summaries of

Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company v. Gamble

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 26, 1998
250 A.D.2d 540 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Company v. Gamble

Case Details

Full title:LUMBERMENS MUTUAL CASUALTY COMPANY, Respondent, v. GREGORY GAMBLE et al.…

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

Date published: May 26, 1998

Citations

250 A.D.2d 540 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
671 N.Y.S.2d 979

Citing Cases

In re Govt. Employees Inn. Co.

The Supreme Court properly concluded that the petitioner failed to meet its burden of proving that an…

Autoone Ins. v. Schulere

However, Integon failed to present evidence at the hearing that the insurance premium finance agreement…