Opinion
August 8, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dowd, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Contrary to the defendant insurance carrier's intention, we find that a question of fact exists as to whether or not the plaintiff's delay in notifying its carrier of an alleged occurrence was, under all of the attendant circumstances, reasonable and premised on a good faith belief that a claim would not be made against the plaintiff (see, E.T. Nutrition v. Central Mut. Ins. Co., 201 A.D.2d 451; Town of Smithtown v. National Union Fire Ins. Co., 191 A.D.2d 426; Zugnoni v. Travelers Ins. Cos., 179 A.D.2d 1033).
Furthermore, questions of fact exist as to whether or not the alleged occurrence falls within the completed operations hazard and/or the products hazard exclusion of the relevant general liability insurance policy (cf., Logan's Silo Sales Serv. v Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 185 A.D.2d 651).
Under these facts, summary judgment in favor of the defendant insurer was properly denied. Lawrence, J.P., O'Brien, Copertino and Friedmann, JJ., concur.