Case ID: ny-2d_37/html/0733-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Josephine DeVanzo, Respondent, v Newark Insurance Company, Appellant, and Karl & Pasqualone, Inc., Respondent.
    Argued June 11, 1975;
    decided June 26, 1975
    
      
      Bernard Meyerson for appellant.
    
      Richard L. Magro for defendant-respondent.
    
      Leon A. Lauterbach.iov plaintiff-respondent.
   Order affirmed, with costs, on the opinion by Mr. Justice James D. Hopkins at the Appellate Division. Question certified answered in the affirmative. Of course, upon a trial and if within the pleadings, defendant insurer is free to establish, if it can, that the policy was not cancelable by it under section 167-a of the Insurance Law. The present record provides no basis to establish this contention made for the first time in the reply brief submitted by the insurer. In so noting, the court is not in a position to consider the effect, if any, of such cancelability.

Concur: Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Wachtler, Fuchsberg and Cooke.