Key Takeaway
New York courts apply substantive law from other states but use NY procedural law, as shown in this GEICO case involving Virginia insurance law and mailing requirements.
When insurance disputes cross state lines, New York courts must navigate the complex intersection of different states’ laws. This challenge becomes particularly evident when dealing with insurance policies issued in other states but litigated in New York courts. The distinction between substantive and procedural law plays a crucial role in determining which state’s rules apply to specific aspects of a case.
In insurance litigation, substantive law typically governs the terms and conditions of coverage, while procedural law controls how evidence must be presented and proven in court. This division can create interesting scenarios where courts apply one state’s insurance statutes but another state’s evidentiary requirements. Understanding this distinction is essential for practitioners handling multi-jurisdictional insurance matters, particularly in no-fault insurance cases where proper notice and procedural compliance are critical.
Jason Tenenbaum’s Analysis:
Acupuncture Now, P.C. v GEICO Ins. Co., 2018 NY Slip Op 51084(U)(App. Term 2d Dept. 2018)
“While defendant asserts that Virginia law applies to this case, as the insurance policy had been obtained in Virginia, and it insured a Virginia resident and vehicle, defendant failed to demonstrate that it had mailed its cancellation notice in accordance with its office practices and procedures (see St. Vincent’s Hosp. of Richmond v Government Empls. Ins. Co., 50 AD3d 1123 ) “by registered or certified mail,” as required by the applicable statute (Va. Code Ann. § 38.2-2208 ). Consequently, the Civil Court should have denied the branch of defendant’s cross motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that defendant had properly cancelled the policy and that there was, therefore, no coverage at the time of the accident at issue.”
What is interesting here is that Civil Courts will apply substantive law from sister states but then apply NY procedural law. This has been displayed many times (this is nothing new). It appears “mailing” is procedural at best.
Key Takeaway
This case demonstrates the consistent approach New York courts take in choice of law scenarios: applying other states’ substantive insurance law while maintaining New York’s procedural requirements for proving compliance. The classification of mailing requirements as procedural rather than substantive can significantly impact litigation outcomes, as seen in this GEICO case where proper mailing procedures became the decisive factor.
