Filed Date: 3/14/2008
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/1/2024
Supreme Court properly granted plaintiffs cross motion seeking summary judgment declaring that defendant must provide SUM coverage to plaintiffs for the accident in question. The record establishes that, as soon as defendant learned of the settlement, it possessed all of the information necessary to deny coverage and disclaim liability (see Squires v Marini Bldrs., 293 AD2d 808, 810 [2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 502 [2002]; cf. Ace Packing Co., Inc. v Campbell Solberg Assoc., Inc., 41 AD3d 12, 15 [2007]). In view of the failure of defendant to justify its 36-day delay in notifying plaintiffs of its disclaimer, the court properly concluded that the delay was unreasonable as a matter of law (see First Fin. Ins. Co. v Jetco Contr. Corp., 1 NY3d 64, 70 [2003]; Bovis Lend Lease LMB, Inc. v Royal Surplus Lines Ins. Co., 27 AD3d 84, 88-90 [2005]; West 16th St. Tenants Corp. v Public Serv. Mut. Ins. Co., 290 AD2d 278, 279 [2002], lv denied 98 NY2d 605 [2002]). Present—Smith, J.P., Centra, Fahey, Peradotto and Green, JJ. [See 13 Misc 3d 1241(A), 2006 NY Slip Op 52211(17) (2006).]