From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lend Lease v. Travelers Property Casualty

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 4, 2010
78 A.D.3d 405 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)

Opinion

No. 3520.

November 4, 2010.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Paul G. Feinman, J.), entered August 20, 2009, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendant's cross motion for summary judgment declaring no duty to defend or indemnify plaintiff Bovis in an underlying personal injury action, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Newman Myers Kreines Gross Harris, P.C., New York (Olivia M. Gross and Howard Altman of counsel), for appellants.

Lazare Potter Giacovas LLP, New York (Jeremy M. Sokop of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, Catterson, DeGrasse and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.


As a purported additional insured under a commercial liability policy, Bovis was required to give defendant notice of the underlying claim as soon as practicable. Absent a valid excuse, the failure to satisfy this notice requirement, which is a condition precedent to coverage, vitiates the policy ( Security Mut. Ins. Co. of N.Y. v Acker-Fitzsimons Corp., 31 NY2d 436, 440 ). Here, defendant properly denied coverage inasmuch as plaintiffs May 2006 notice was not given to defendant until nine months after the claim accrued.


Summaries of

Lend Lease v. Travelers Property Casualty

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 4, 2010
78 A.D.3d 405 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
Case details for

Lend Lease v. Travelers Property Casualty

Case Details

Full title:BOVIS LEND LEASE LMB, INC., et al., Appellants, v. TRAVELERS PROPERTY…

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

Date published: Nov 4, 2010

Citations

78 A.D.3d 405 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 7802
909 N.Y.S.2d 630

Citing Cases

QBE Ins. Corp. v. M&R European Constr. Corp.

) "Absent, a valid excuse, a failure to satisfy the notice requirement vitiates the policy." (Security Mut.…

N.Y. Marine & Gen. Ins. Co. v. Ill. Union Ins. Co.

See ARCH Policy, at 12, at ARCH motion, exhibit "A." It is well established that "a purported additional…