New York Law Review

De Luca v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp., 17 N.Y.2d 76 (1966): Statute of Limitations for MVAIC Claims

Published by

The New York Law Review

in

17 N.Y.2d 76 (1966)

A claim against the Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation (MVAIC) based on an insurance policy is governed by the six-year contract statute of limitations, not the three-year tort statute of limitations.

Summary

Two claimants, insured drivers injured by uninsured motorists, filed claims with MVAIC and subsequently demanded arbitration more than three years after their accidents. MVAIC argued that the claims were time-barred by the three-year statute of limitations applicable to torts. The Court of Appeals held that the six-year statute of limitations for contract actions applied because the claim against MVAIC arose from the insurance policy, not the tort itself. The court reasoned that the “legally entitled to recover” language in the policy requires proof of fault and damages as of the claim’s initial filing, but does not incorporate the tort statute of limitations.

Facts

Two separate cases are at issue, both involving similar fact patterns:

  1. In De Luca, Theodore De Luca, an insured driver, was injured in an accident with an uninsured motorist in 1960. De Luca filed a claim with MVAIC but did not demand arbitration until 1964.
  2. In Bradanese, Mary E. Bradanese and others were injured in a similar accident in 1960 and also delayed demanding arbitration until 1964.
  3. In both cases, the claimants had automobile liability insurance policies with MVAIC endorsements.
  4. The accidents involved uninsured motorists.
  5. The claimants filed claims with MVAIC shortly after the accidents but did not demand arbitration until more than three years later.

Procedural History

  1. MVAIC moved to stay arbitration in both cases, arguing the claims were barred by the three-year statute of limitations for torts.
  2. Special Term denied the motions to stay arbitration.
  3. The Appellate Division unanimously affirmed the Special Term decisions.
  4. The Court of Appeals granted leave to appeal to resolve the statute of limitations issue.

Issue(s)

Whether the three-year statute of limitations for tort actions or the six-year statute of limitations for contract actions applies to a claim against MVAIC arising from the MVAIC endorsement to an insurance policy.

Holding

Yes, the six-year statute of limitations for contract actions applies because the claim against MVAIC exists solely by reason of the coverage provided by the insurance policy.

Court’s Reasoning

The court reasoned that the claim against MVAIC is fundamentally based on the insurance contract, not the underlying tort. Absent the insurance policy, there would be no basis for recovery against MVAIC. Therefore, the contract statute of limitations governs.

The court rejected MVAIC’s argument that the policy language requiring MVAIC to pay what the insured is

More ARTICLES