Central General Hospital, as Assignee of Pamela Mandresh, Respondent v. Chubb Group of Insurance Companies, Also…

Summary

The New York Court of Appeals reversed the Appellate Division, holding that an insurer's untimely disclaimer does not bar a defense of lack of coverage in an Insurance Law § 5106(a) action. The court further held that the preclusion remedy does apply to a defense that the medical treatment was excessive, precluding the insurer from asserting that defense. Justice Wesley, in a concurring opinion, disagreed with the majority on the scope of the exemption, arguing that the excessiveness defense should also be exempt from preclusion.