Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Gutstein

New York Court of Appeals

Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Gutstein

599 N.E.2d 672, 80 N.Y.2d 773, 587 N.Y.S.2d 268, 1992 N.Y. LEXIS 1530

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedJune 4, 1992

StatusPublished

Cited by22 cases

This text of 599 N.E.2d 672 (Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Gutstein) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Gutstein, 599 N.E.2d 672, 80 N.Y.2d 773, 587 N.Y.S.2d 268, 1992 N.Y. LEXIS 1530 (N.Y. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, and the petition to stay arbitration granted.

Under the facts of this case as found by Supreme Court, respondent, who maintained an apartment in Manhattan where he resided more than 80% of the time, is not a covered person entitled to uninsured motorist benefits under his father’s insurance policy. The policy provides such coverage only for a "family member”, defined in the policy as "a person related to [the insured] by blood, marriage or adoption who is a resident of [the insured’s] household”.

Although respondent stored some belongings in his parent’s New Jersey house and spent the night there occasionally, we conclude that Supreme Court’s finding that respondent was not a resident of his father’s household more nearly comports with the weight of the evidence than does the Appellate Division’s contrary finding.

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa concur in memorandum.

Order reversed, etc.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI