Allstate Insurance v. Caulfield

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Allstate Insurance v. Caulfield

288 A.D.2d 212, 732 N.Y.S.2d 374, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10491

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

DecidedNovember 5, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 288 A.D.2d 212 (Allstate Insurance v. Caulfield) 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

Allstate Insurance v. Caulfield, 288 A.D.2d 212, 732 N.Y.S.2d 374, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10491 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding, inter alia, pursuant to CPLR article 75 to stay arbitration of a claim for uninsured motorist benefits, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Rosenblum, Ref.), entered November 27, 2000, which, after a hearing, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.

The record does not support the contention of the appellant, Allstate Insurance Company, that the notice of cancellation of the insurance policy issued by Allcity Insurance Company was not in strict compliance with the requirements of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 313 (1) (a). Accordingly, the referee properly concluded that the policy had been cancelled and there was no coverage at the time of the accident (see, Matter of Progressive Northeastern Ins. Co. v Robbins, 279 AD2d 631, 632, lv denied 96 NY2d 711). Ritter, J. P., Goldstein, Friedmann, Feuerstein and Crane, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding, inter alia, pursuant to CPLR article 75 to stay arbitration of a claim for uninsured motorist benefits, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Rosenblum, Ref.), entered November 27, 2000, which, after a hearing, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.

The record does not support the contention of the appellant, Allstate Insurance Company, that the notice of cancellation of the insurance policy issued by Allcity Insurance Company was not in strict compliance with the requirements of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 313 (1) (a). Accordingly, the referee properly concluded that the policy had been cancelled and there was no coverage at the time of the accident (see, Matter of Progressive Northeastern Ins. Co. v Robbins, 279 AD2d 631, 632, lv denied 96 NY2d 711). Ritter, J. P., Goldstein, Friedmann, Feuerstein and Crane, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

288 A.D.2d 212, 732 N.Y.S.2d 374, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10491, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/allstate-insurance-v-caulfield-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack