Romito v. Bourjois, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that late notification “may also prevent the insurer from providing a sufficient reserve fund”
• stating that there is no exception to timely notice requirement “for losses which appear insubstantial or which in the insured’s estimation may not ultimately ripen into a claim”
• stating that “what is reasonable is ordinarily left for determination at trial,” but finding untimely notice as a matter of law because there was no excuse for the delay and an absence of mitigating factors
• finding unjustified delay of fifty-three days to violate prompt notification provision
• 53-day delay in providing notice of occurrence deemed unreasonably long as a matter of law
• delay of 53 days in giving notice was unreasonable

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).