Legal Opinion
Holskin v. Hurwitz
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided February 6, 1925PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Burr, J.:
Plaintiff claims he gave defendant, an insurance broker, a fire policy for the sole purpose of having a rate reduction made; that the insurance company instead, canceled the policy, and so notified defendant, but defendant did not transmit this notice to plaintiff. A fire occurred some time after the cancellation, and plaintiff sues for damages sustained by the fire, asserting that the proximate cause of the loss was defendant’s failure to notify plaintiff of the cancellation of the policy.
The allegations of the complaint are as follows: That on July *73221, 1923, plaintiff had a fire…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Hermann v. Niagara Fire InsururanceNew York Court of Appeals · 1885
- Todd v. Union Casualty & Surety Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1902
- Healy v. Insurance Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1900
- Fries-Breslin Co. v. BergenCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1909
- Fries-Breslin Co. v. BerganSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
3Cited by8 opinions
- Globalnet financial.com, Inc. v. Frank Crystal & Co., Inc., A.I. Credit Corp., Docket No. 04-6679-CvCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2006
- Zeff Distributing Co. v. Aetna Casualty and Surety CompanySupreme Court of Missouri · 1965
- Blonsky v. Allstate InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1985
- Zeman v. Zack Agency, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
- Kimball v. Clinton County New Patrons Fire Relief Ass'nAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1965
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.