Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. v. Grauman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. v. Grauman

119 A.D.2d 820, 501 N.Y.S.2d 618, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55760

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

DecidedApril 28, 1986

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 119 A.D.2d 820 (Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. v. Grauman) 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

Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. v. Grauman, 119 A.D.2d 820, 501 N.Y.S.2d 618, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55760 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a proceeding to stay arbitration of the respondent’s claim under the uninsured motorist endorsement of an insurance policy, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Brucia, J.), entered May 13, 1985, which, upon finding, after a hearing, that there had been physical contact between the motor vehicle driven by the respondent and a "hit and run” vehicle, inter alia, dismissed the proceeding and directed the parties to proceed to arbitration.

Order affirmed, with costs.

It was within Special Term’s discretion to resolve the inconsistencies in this matter in favor of the respondent. The finding of physical contact between the respondent’s vehicle and a "hit and run” vehicle was supported by a fair preponderance of the credible evidence before the court (see, Matter of Crum & Forster Ins. Cos. [Formisano], 76 AD2d 864). Lazer, J. P., Bracken, Brown, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.

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

— In a proceeding to stay arbitration of the respondent’s claim under the uninsured motorist endorsement of an insurance policy, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Brucia, J.), entered May 13, 1985, which, upon finding, after a hearing, that there had been physical contact between the motor vehicle driven by the respondent and a "hit and run” vehicle, inter alia, dismissed the proceeding and directed the parties to proceed to arbitration.

Order affirmed, with costs.

It was within Special Term’s discretion to resolve the inconsistencies in this matter in favor of the respondent. The finding of physical contact between the respondent’s vehicle and a "hit and run” vehicle was supported by a fair preponderance of the credible evidence before the court (see, Matter of Crum & Forster Ins. Cos. [Formisano], 76 AD2d 864). Lazer, J. P., Bracken, Brown, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

119 A.D.2d 820, 501 N.Y.S.2d 618, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 55760, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/avis-rent-a-car-system-inc-v-grauman-nyappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack