Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Kunz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Kunz

182 A.D.2d 685, 582 N.Y.S.2d 272, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5989

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 13, 1992

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 182 A.D.2d 685 (Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Kunz) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York 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. Kunz, 182 A.D.2d 685, 582 N.Y.S.2d 272, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5989 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to permanently stay the arbitration of a claim for underinsured motorist benefits, the petitioner Aetna Casualty and Surety Company appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Molloy, J.), dated January 12, 1990, which dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, the petition is granted, and arbitration is permanently stayed.

Although the insurance policy at issue is arguably ambiguous as to whether the respondent had purchased merely the required uninsured motorist coverage (see, Insurance Law § 3420 [f] [1]) or whether he had also purchased underinsured motorist coverage (see, Insurance Law § 3420 [f] [2]), the petitioner was entitled to a stay of arbitration. Since the respondent clearly purchased a policy with a $10,000 limit for bodily injury for "each person” and $20,000 for "each accident” and since the policy covering the other vehicle involved in the accident had a limit of $25,000, "underinsured” motorist coverage was "definitionally not available” (see, Maurizzio v Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co., 73 NY2d 951, 953; Matter of Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v Schulman, 162 AD2d 450, 451), and there can be no claim to arbitrate here. Thompson, J. P., Harwood, Balletta and Copertino, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to permanently stay the arbitration of a claim for underinsured motorist benefits, the petitioner Aetna Casualty and Surety Company appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Molloy, J.), dated January 12, 1990, which dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, the petition is granted, and arbitration is permanently stayed.

Although the insurance policy at issue is arguably ambiguous as to whether the respondent had purchased merely the required uninsured motorist coverage (see, Insurance Law § 3420 [f] [1]) or whether he had also purchased underinsured motorist coverage (see, Insurance Law § 3420 [f] [2]), the petitioner was entitled to a stay of arbitration. Since the respondent clearly purchased a policy with a $10,000 limit for bodily injury for "each person” and $20,000 for "each accident” and since the policy covering the other vehicle involved in the accident had a limit of $25,000, "underinsured” motorist coverage was "definitionally not available” (see, Maurizzio v Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co., 73 NY2d 951, 953; Matter of Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v Schulman, 162 AD2d 450, 451), and there can be no claim to arbitrate here. Thompson, J. P., Harwood, Balletta and Copertino, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

182 A.D.2d 685, 582 N.Y.S.2d 272, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5989, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aetna-casualty-surety-co-v-kunz-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack