Legal Opinion
Pagan v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided March 22, 2011PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation (hereinafter 3VIVAIC) opposed the petition for leave to commence an action against it on the ground that the petitioner failed to establish his compliance with the statutory requirement that notice to a police, peace, or judicial officer of the subject accident be given within 24 hours, the satisfaction of which is a condition precedent to qualifying for benefits from ¡MVAIC (see *1103Insurance Law § 5208 [a] [2] [A]; § 5218 [c]). “[T]he courts have ‘consistently afforded a very liberal interpretation to the notice requirement, accepting…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Canty v. Motor Vehicle Accident inDemnification Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- Dixon v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1977
- In re the Arbitration between Country Wide Insurance & RussoAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- Caceres v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- Schmid v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
3Cited by4 opinions
- Hernandez v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
- Kumar v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2016
- Matter of Laszlone v. Motor Veh. Acc. Indem. Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2018
- Matter of Ramirez v. Motor Veh. Acc. Indem. Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2025