Majority
The Supreme Court properly concluded that the petitioner failed to meet its burden of proving that an insurance policy endorsement dated October 21, 2005, which purportedly reduced the limits applicable to the uninsured/underinsured motorist endorsement of the relevant policy to the sums of $25,000 per person and $50,000 per accident, was properly mailed to the policy holder prior to the date of the subject accident. The underwriter who testified at the hearing failed to offer “evidence of an office [procedure] geared to insure the likelihood
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition and directed the parties to proceed to arbitration. Rivera, J.E, Miller, Leventhal and Chambers, JJ., concur.
Cases cited
- Federal Insurance v. Kimbrough 116 AD2d 692 at 692 p. 854
- Nassau Insurance v. Murray 46 NY2d 828 at 829-830 p. 854
- Transcontinental Insurance v. Gibbs 34 AD3d 488 p. 854
- New York & Presbyterian Hospital v. Allstate Insurance 29 AD3d 547 p. 854
- Allstate Insurance v. Ramirez 208 AD2d 828 at 830 p. 854
- Sea Insurance v. Kopsky 137 AD2d 804 p. 854
- Anzalone v. State Farm Mutual Insurance 92 AD2d 238 p. 854
- Kaufmann v. Leatherstocking Cooperative Insurance 52 AD3d 1010 at 1012 p. 854
- Morales v. Yaghoobian 13 AD3d 424 at 425 p. 854
- Metlife Auto & Home v. Pennella 10 AD3d 726 p. 854