Legal Opinion

Carnegie Hill 90th Street, Inc. v. Greater New York Mutual Insurance

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

Decided April 20, 2000PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila AbdusSalaam, J.), entered June 21, 1999, which to the extent appealed from as limited by the brief, granted defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs first four causes of action as barred by a two-year contractually established limitations period, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff has not offered evidence from which a clear manifestation of intent by defendant to relinquish the protection of the limitations period set forth in the parties’ contract of insurance can be reasonably inferred (see, Carat Diamond Corp. v Underwriters at…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Carat Diamond Corp. v. Underwriters at Lloyd's, LondonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
  2. Kaufman v. Republic InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1974

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Beekman Regent Condominium Ass'n v. Greater New York Mutual InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API