Legal Opinion

Katz v. Travelers Indemnity Co. of Hartford

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided November 6, 1931PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

The sole issue tendered by the pleadings, litigated by the parties and submitted to the jury, was whether the plaintiff had received sufficient notice of cancellation of the policy. Under its terms either party might cancel at any time without cause. The defendant, therefore, was not required to assign non-payment of premium as the ground for cancellation, or any other reason. The obligation of the defendant upon giving such notice of cancellation to return the pro rata unearned premium, or make tender thereof, is raised for the first time on this appeal. It was not submitted to the jury, nor…

2Cited by2 opinions

  1. Barbato v. VollmerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1948
  2. Kaminsky v. American Newspapers, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1940

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API