Legal Opinion
Ward v. Gresham
New York Court of Appeals
Decided June 14, 1983PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
The premium finance agency, having fully complied with subdivision 1 of section 576 of the Banking Law in sending the notice of intent to cancel and the subsequent notice of cancellation, was not required to comply with section 313 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law, relating to the provision of an additional time period prior to cancellation by an insurer. The Legislature has indicated that the procedures to be followed in canceling a policy differ for insurers and premium finance agencies, and…
2Cited by8 opinions
- ELRAC, Inc. v. WhiteAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. PreisigkeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
- AIU Insurance v. RodriguezAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007
- Claim of Palminteri v. Lex Fire Protection Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
- Foster v. AbramsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.