With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". No. 7:09-CV-09003, 2010 WL 6501383, at *4 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 6, 2010) (citing cases). This Court, applying New York law, has recently held a delay of forty days to be reasonable. See Mount Vernon Fire Ins. Co. v. Munoz Trucking Corp., 213 F.Supp.3d 594, 605-06 (S.D.N.Y. 2016), appeal withdrawn sub nom. (Oct. 31, 2016). Another case in this Court held that a time period between notice and disclaimer of fifty-five days was reasonable as a matter of'law where the insurer “submitted proof that the delay in disclaiming was based upon its prompt, diligent and good faith investigation with respect to coverage.” U.S. Underwriters Ins. Co. v. 614 Constr. Corp., 142 F.Supp.2d 491, 496 (S.D.N.Y. 2001), aff'd 23 Fed.Appx. 92 (2d Cir. 2002); see also Mount Vernon Fire Ins. Co., 193 F.Supp.2d at 677-78 (<HOLDING>). There is no exact number of days that can be

A: holding that a fiftyday delay to conduct an investigation was reasonable as a matter of law
B: holding that seventeenmonth delay in abandoning premises is not within a reasonable time as a matter of law
C: holding that an eightmonth delay without excuse was unreasonable as a matter of law
D: holding that an over twoyear delay without any excuse was unreasonable as a matter of law
A.