Legal Opinion

Bloom v. St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc.

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

Decided December 23, 2008PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*820The plaintiff Jonathan Bloom purchased a “SCOPE” umbrella policy of insurance issued by the defendants which provided supplemental underinsured motorist (hereinafter SUM) coverage. In 2001 the defendants substituted a “PLUS” umbrella policy, which did not provide SUM coverage, for the “SCOPE” policy. Although the defendants mailed the plaintiffs a document entitled “Summary of Major Coverage Changes,” that document failed to comply with the requirement of Insurance Law § 3425 (d) (3) that the “[njotice of intention to substitute a different policy form shall be accompanied by a full and clear…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hay v. . Star Fire Insurance CompanyNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
  2. Mandarino v. Travelers Property Casualty InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
  3. ELRAC, Inc. v. SueroAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
  4. Byron v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1978
  5. Janes v. New York Central Mutual InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Valentine v. Quincy Mutual Fire InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
  2. Gotkin v. Allstate InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016

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

Powered by the Exa API