Legal Opinion
Conte v. Yorkshire Insurance
New York Supreme Court
Decided April 3, 1957PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtOwen McGivern, J.
In this action by an insured under a fire insurance policy to recover the amount of an alleged fire loss, plaintiff has moved for summary judgment and the defendant has made a cross motion for similar relief.
The principal defense is the one-year Statute of Limitations contained in. the so-called standard form fire insurance policy prescribed by section 168 of the Insurance Law. Coneededly, the instant action was not commenced within 12 months £ £ after inception of the loss ”, as required by the standard policy. But in this particular instance, there was omitted from the policy issued to the…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Hamilton v. Royal Insurance Co. of Liverpool, EnglandNew York Court of Appeals · 1898
- Hicks v. British America Assurance Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1900
- Welch v. Fire Ass'n of PhiladelphiaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
- Bakker v. Aetna Life Ins. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1934
- Suslensky v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1943
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Robert Clark, Jr. v. Union Mutual Life Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1982
- Hanover Insurance v. Fireman's Fund InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Brown MacH. Works & Supply Co. v. Ins. Co. of North Am.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1995
- Elliano v. Assurance Co. of AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
- Eidemiller v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceSupreme Court of Kansas · 1997
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.