74 A.D.2d 875 | N.Y. App. Div. | 1980
In a proceeding to stay arbitration, petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered September 22, 1978, denying the application. Judgment reversed, on the law, with $50 costs and disbursements, and application granted. The issue is whether Great American Insurance Company’s purported cancellation of Jean Haskins’ insurance policy prior to June 2, 1974, the stated expiration date, was effective, and, if not, whether the insurance coverage continued up to the date of the instant accident, January 1, 1975. Special Term correctly found, after a hearing, that the Haskins policy was not effectively canceled prior to its expiration date. However, we find erroneous its further finding that the policy nevertheless expired by its terms on June 2, 1974 and that Oswald C. Matthews could compel his insurance company to arbitrate his claim under the uninsured motorist provision of his insurance policy. We base this conclusion on the statutory requirements for cancellation outlined in section 167-a of the Insurance Law and on relevant case law construing said requirements. According to section 167-a, an insurer may cancel a policy for nonpayment of premiums by giving timely written notice to the insured, or it may refuse to renew on written notice showing specific reasons for nonrenewal. Case law demonstrates that this notice requirement is strictly construed, necessitating literal compliance on the part of the insurer, with any ambiguities being interpreted in favor of the insured (Government Employees Ins. Co. v Mizell, 36 AD2d 452). In Capra v Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co. (31 NY2d 760, on remand 43 AD2d 986), a case presenting virtually identical facts to those at bar, an automobile policy was held to be automatically renewed after its expiration because of the insurer’s failure to tender a proper notice of nonrenewal. Capra has been followed in this Department, most recently in Matter of Safeco Ins. Co. (Testagrossa) (67 AD2d 979).
