Worcester Insurance v. Bettenhauser

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that timely disclaimer was necessary when denial of coverage was predicated on a designated Exclusion
• holding that a disclaimer of liability is required when “denial of coverage is based upon an exclusion set forth in a policy without which the claim would be covered” (citing Zappone, 55 N.Y.2d at 134, 138, 447 N.Y.S.2d 911, 432 N.E.2d 783)
• explaining that an insurer need not comply with section 3420(d)’s disclaimer requirements “when a claim falls outside the scope of the policy’s coverage portion” because “the insurance policy does not contemplate coverage in the first instance”
• noting the line drawn by New York courts \between a lack of coverage in the first instance and a lack of coverage based on an exclusion\
• noting the line drawn by New York courts \between a lack of coverage in the first instance (requiring no disclaimer) and a lack of coverage based on an exclusion (requiring timely disclaimer)\
• noting the line drawn by New York courts “between a lack of coverage in the first instance and a lack of coverage based on an exclusion”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).