Summary
In Gluck v. London Lancashire Ind. Co. (2 N.Y.2d 953) we held that a question of fact was created concerning whether a delay in giving notice of about four and one-half months after the accident was excused on account of lack of knowledge of the insured of the existence of liability of insurer.
Summary of this case from Greyhound Corp. v. Gen. Acc. Assur. Corp.Opinion
Argued February 27, 1957
Decided April 4, 1957
Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, A. DAVID BENJAMIN, J.
Joseph Kane and Edward Pacelli for appellant.
Nathaniel Rothstein for respondent.
Order affirmed and judgment absolute ordered against defendant on the stipulation, with costs in all courts. No opinion.
Concur: CONWAY, Ch. J., DESMOND, DYE, FULD, FROESSEL and BURKE, JJ. VAN VOORHIS, J., dissents and votes to reverse and to dismiss the complaint upon the ground that recovery is precluded by failure to give written notice of loss as required by the terms of the insurance policy.