Opinion
March 17, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Kristin Booth Glen, J.).
The IAS Court properly determined that the plaintiff's letter of January 31, 1991 constituted proper notice of a change of address to which all future notices had to be sent by the defendant. In view of plaintiff's unrebutted testimony of actual mailing and defendant's offer of only general office procedures, the presumption of receipt arising from mailing was properly applied (see, Engel v. Lichterman, 62 N.Y.2d 943). Accordingly, the notices sent by defendant following this letter were not properly sent to the correct address and were therefore nullities. The parties' agreement required written notice and therefore defendant's claim of oral notice is not reasonable (UCC 9-504).
We have considered defendant's remaining contentions and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Ellerin, Rubin, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.