At issue is whether plaintiff's omission of item No. 6 on the first "proof of loss" statement filed, and its omission of items Nos. 6 and 7 on the second "proof of loss" statement constituted an "unexcused and willful refusal to comply" with the insurance contract requirement which is a condition precedent to a suit for losses covered under the policy. (Lentini Bros. Moving & Stor. Co. v New York Prop. Ins. Underwriting Assn.,
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Let's get started
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
NINTH FED. SAV. & LOAN ASS'N OF NEW YORK CITY v. NEW YORK PROP. INS. UNDERWRITING ASS'N
99 A.D.2d 456 (1984)
Ninth Federal Savings and Loan Association of New York City, Appellant, v. New York Property Insurance Underwriting Association, Respondent, et al., Defendant
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
January 24, 1984
January 24, 1984
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.
Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.
Cited Cases
- No Cases Found
Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.