Jones v. Allstate Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 27 November 1995 |
| Citation | 221 A.D.2d 596,634 N.Y.S.2d 176 |
| Parties | Gerald JONES, et al., Respondents, v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Voute, Lohrfink, Magro & Collins, White Plains (Kevin P. Fitzpatrick and Dennis Glascott, of counsel), for appellant.
Arthur H. Goodman, White Plains, for respondents.
Before BRACKEN, J.P., and ROSENBLATT, MILLER and KRAUSMAN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In an action for a judgment declaring the existence of certain automobile insurance coverage, the defendant Allstate Insurance Company appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Putnam County (Hickman, J.), dated October 14, 1994, which declared that the plaintiffs were covered by a policy of automobile insurance issued by the defendant concerning an accident which occurred on January 21, 1990.
ORDERED that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, and it is declared that the plaintiffs are not entitled to insurance coverage from the defendant in connection with the accident which occurred on January 21, 1990.
At the hearing held before the Supreme Court, the defendant Allstate Insurance Company (hereinafter Allstate) adduced competent, credible evidence that it effectively cancelled the policy of insurance covering the plaintiffs' 1987 Oldsmobile as of September 4, 1988. Through the testimony of two knowledgable employees, Allstate introduced into evidence a copy of the notice of cancellation it sent to the plaintiffs on August 17, 1988, along with a properly endorsed postal service certificate of mailing, both generated and retained in the ordinary course of business. Supported by the testimony of the two Allstate employees as to routine cancellation notice mailing procedures, these documents constitute conclusive proof of compliance with the mailing requirements of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 313(1)(a) and thus Allstate's termination of the policy for non-payment of premiums was efficacious (see, Vehicle and Traffic Law § 313[1][b]; see also, Matter of State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Morales, 207 A.D.2d 546, 615 N.Y.S.2d 936; Matter of State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Cherian, 202 A.D.2d 434, 608 N.Y.S.2d 708; Diaz v. Great Am. Ins. Co., 109 A.D.2d 775, 486 N.Y.S.2d 289). Moreover, the plaintiffs acknowledged that during the approximate 17-month period between the cancellation of the policy and the one car accident in January 1990, they paid no premiums to Allstate and never renewed their...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Garcia v. Gov't Emps. Ins. Co.
...638 ).Finally, GEICO established, prima facie, that it properly sent Rakowski notice of the cancellation (see Jones v. Allstate Ins. Co., 221 A.D.2d 596, 597, 634 N.Y.S.2d 176 ). In opposition, Garcia failed to raise a triable issue of fact.Garcia's remaining contentions are without merit.A......
- Jantzen v. Leslie Edelman of New York, Inc.