TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Pedrick v. Commercial Union Insurance

Beverly J. Pedrick v. Commercial Union Insurance Company

Pedrick v. Commercial Union Ins., 132 A.D.2d 980 (1987)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · State Appellate Courts
Decided
July 10, 1987
Docket
No. 1
Citations
132 A.D.2d 980518 N.Y.S.2d 5331987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 49450

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs, in accordance with the following memorandum: Plaintiff sued defendant to recover on an insurance policy for loss sustained in a burglary at her apartment. Defendant refused payment, alleging as a first affirmative defense that plaintiff did not submit proof of loss within 60 days of defendant’s demand as required by the policy. Special Term properly denied summary judgment to defendant, but improperly granted plaintiff’s cross motion to dismiss defendant’s first affirmative defense. Although plaintiff’s proof of loss was submitted beyond the 60-day period, there are questions of fact whether defendant waived the requirement or should be estopped from asserting it.

At the examination, held within the 60-day period, plaintiff informed defendant’s counsel that she had substantially completed the proof of loss forms (containing eight pages and over 100 items), except for the value of three items which she could not obtain at that time. When defendant’s counsel told plaintiff to wait until all the items were valued before submitting the proof of loss, he may have lulled her into believing that the proof of loss did not have to be submitted within a particular time (see, Cardinale v Genesee Val. Med. Care, 94 AD2d 966, 967 ; Dresserville Farms v Firemen’s Ins. Co., 54 AD2d 1118, 1119 ; see also, 31 NY Jur, Insurance, § 1300 et seq).

On this record there is an issue of fact precluding summary judgment whether defendant waived the 60-day provision of the policy (see, Guadagno v Colonial Coop. Ins. Co., 101 AD2d 947 ; Teitelbaum v New York Prop. Ins. Underwriting Assn., 126 Misc 2d 240, 243 ). It was error for Special Term to dismiss defendant’s first affirmative defense (that proof of loss was not submitted within 60 days) because at trial defendant may be able to establish that it did not waive its rights under the terms of the policy. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Oneida County, Tenney, J.—summary judgment.) Present— *981 Dillon, P. J., Callahan, Green, Balio and Davis, JJ. [See, 134 Misc 2d 313 .]

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

1987: 11988: 11995: 12000: 12001: 12021: 12022: 219872026peak 2022 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Varda, Inc. v. Insurance Co. of North America701 F. Supp. 57 (S.D.N.Y. 1988)
  2. Weintraub v. Great Northern Insurance CompanyNo. 1:21-cv-07965 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 29, 2021)
  3. Weintraub v. Great Northern Insurance CompanyNo. 1:21-cv-07965 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 15, 2022)
  4. Weintraub v. Great Northern Insurance CompanyNo. 1:21-cv-07965 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 30, 2022)
  5. Brown MacH. Works & Supply Co. v. Ins. Co. of North Am.659 So. 2d 51 (Ala. 1995)
  6. Bailey v. Charter Oak Fire Insurance273 A.D.2d 691 (2000)

Most recent

  1. Weintraub v. Great Northern Insurance CompanyNo. 1:21-cv-07965 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 30, 2022)
  2. Weintraub v. Great Northern Insurance CompanyNo. 1:21-cv-07965 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 15, 2022)
  3. Weintraub v. Great Northern Insurance CompanyNo. 1:21-cv-07965 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 29, 2021)
  4. Travis v. Allstate Insurance280 A.D.2d 394 (2001)
  5. Bailey v. Charter Oak Fire Insurance273 A.D.2d 691 (2000)
  6. Brown MacH. Works & Supply Co. v. Ins. Co. of North Am.659 So. 2d 51 (Ala. 1995)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 5

DepthCaseCited by
Guadagno v. Colonial Coop. Ins., 101 A.D.2d 947 (1984) 12
Pedrick v. Commercial Union Ins., 134 Misc. 2d 313 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1986) 7
Cardinale v. Genesee Valley Med. Care, 94 A.D.2d 966 (1983) 6
Dresserville Farms, Inc. v. Firemen's Ins., 54 A.D.2d 1118 (1976) 4
Teitelbaum v. N.Y. Prop. Ins. Underwriting Ass'n, 126 Misc. 2d 240 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1984) 1

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list