Nassau Ins. Co. v. Murray
| Decision Date | 27 December 1978 |
| Citation | 414 N.Y.S.2d 117,46 N.Y.2d 828,386 N.E.2d 1085 |
| Parties | , 386 N.E.2d 1085 NASSAU INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. Diane M. MURRAY et al., Respondents. In the Matter of EMPIRE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. Philip SASH et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
In both cases, the orders of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
Where, as here, the proof exhibits an office practice and procedure followed by the insurers in the regular course of their business, which shows that the notices of cancellation have been duly addressed and mailed, a presumption arises that those notices have been received by the insureds (News Syndicate Co. v. Gatti Paper Stock Corp., 256 N.Y. 211, 214, 176 N.E. 169, 170; Gardam & Son v. Batterson, 198 N.Y. 175, 178, 91 N.E. 371, 372; Richardson, Evidence (Prince 10th ed.), § 80). Denial of receipt by the insureds, standing alone, is insufficient to rebut the presumption. In addition to a claim of no receipt, there must be a showing that routine office practice was not followed or was so careless that it would be unreasonable to assume that the notice was mailed (see Trusts & Guar. Co. v. Barnhardt, 270 N.Y. 350, 354-355, 1 N.E.2d 459, 461). We would hasten to add, however, that in order for the presumption to arise, office practice must be geared so as to ensure the likelihood that a notice of cancellation is always properly addressed and mailed.
In each case: Order affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Optivision, Inc. v. Syracuse Shopping Ctr. Assoc.
...Of course, there is no presumption that an incorrectly addressed letter was duly received, cf. Nassau Insurance Co. v. Murray, 46 N.Y.2d 828, 414 N.Y.S.2d 117, 386 N.E.2d 1085 (1978), and the Court accepts Mr. Rosenberg's testimony that the letter signed by Mr. Ransom was not received by hi......
-
Baltazar v. Houslanger & Assocs., PLLC
...or was 'so careless that it would be unreasonable to assume that the notice was mailed.'" Id. (quoting Nassau Ins. Co. v. Murray, 46 N.Y.2d 828, 830, 386 N.E.2d 1085, 1086 (N.Y. 1978)). Notwithstanding whether Defendants have adequately set forth "an office practice or procedure," it is pre......
-
Owusu v. New York State Ins.
...v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 12 A.D.3d 229, 229, 785 N.Y.S.2d 52, 52 (1st Dep't 2004) (quoting Nassau Ins. Co. v. Murray, 46 N.Y.2d 828, 829, 414 N.Y.S.2d 117, 117, 386 N.E.2d 1085 (1978)). With regard to office procedures, defendant asserts that "it is HSBC's general business practice to......
-
Viviane Etienne Med. Care, P.C. v. Country-Wide Ins. Co.
...so as to ensure the likelihood that [the correspondence] is always properly addressed and mailed” (Nassau Ins. Co. v. Murray, 46 N.Y.2d 828, 830, 414 N.Y.S.2d 117, 386 N.E.2d 1085; see Matter of Eveready Ins. Co. v. France, 66 A.D.3d 776, 776, 887 N.Y.S.2d 208). Here, the plaintiff's submis......
-
Table of cases
...(1st Dept. 2011), § 18:60 Nasca v. Town of Brookhaven, 10 A.D.3d 415, 781 N.Y.S.2d 137 (2d Dept. 2004), § 7:60 Nassau Ins. Co. v. Murray, 46 N.Y.2d 828, 414 N.Y.S.2d 117 (1978), § 8:20 Natale v. Niagara Mowhawk Power Corp., 135 A.D.2d 955, 522 N.Y.S.2d 364 (3d Dept. 1987), § 16:130 National......
-
Character & habit
...routine behavior, such as mailing oice letters or giving instructions to employees, is generally admissible. Nassau Ins. Co. v. Murray , 46 N.Y.2d 828, 414 N.Y.S.2d 117 (1978); Jonathan Woodner Co. v. Higgins , 179 A.D.2d 444, 578 N.Y.S.2d 561 (1st Dept. 1992); Matter of Lumbermen’s Mutual ......
-
Character & habit
...routine behavior, such as mailing oice letters or giving instructions to employees, is generally admissible. Nassau Ins. Co. v. Murray , 46 N.Y.2d 828, 414 N.Y.S.2d 117 (1978); Jonathan Woodner Co. v. Higgins , 179 A.D.2d 444, 578 N.Y.S.2d 561 (1st Dept. 1992); Matter of Lumbermen’s Mutual ......
-
Character & habit
...behavior, such as mailing office letters or giving instructions to employees, is generally admissible. Nassau Ins. Co. v. Murray , 46 N.Y.2d 828, 414 N.Y.S.2d 117 (1978); Jonathan Woodner Co. v. Higgins , 179 A.D.2d 444, 578 N.Y.S.2d 561 (1st Dept. 1992); Matter of Lumbermen’s Mutual Casual......