Avis Rent A Car Systems, Inc. v. Anderson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Avis Rent A Car Systems, Inc. v. Anderson

271 A.D.2d 606, 707 N.Y.S.2d 336, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4271

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

DecidedApril 17, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 271 A.D.2d 606 (Avis Rent A Car Systems, Inc. v. Anderson) 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 Systems, Inc. v. Anderson, 271 A.D.2d 606, 707 N.Y.S.2d 336, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4271 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to stay arbitration, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Shaughnessy, J.H.O.), dated December 7, 1998, which, upon reargument, granted the petition and stayed the arbitration.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly found that the appellants failed to overcome the presumption that at the time of the accident, the offending vehicle was being operated with its owner’s permission. Accordingly, the petition was properly granted upon reargument (see, Vehicle and Traffic Law § 388; cf., Molina v NYRAC, Inc., 228 AD2d 655). O’Brien, J. P., Joy, Florio and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to stay arbitration, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Shaughnessy, J.H.O.), dated December 7, 1998, which, upon reargument, granted the petition and stayed the arbitration.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly found that the appellants failed to overcome the presumption that at the time of the accident, the offending vehicle was being operated with its owner’s permission. Accordingly, the petition was properly granted upon reargument (see, Vehicle and Traffic Law § 388; cf., Molina v NYRAC, Inc., 228 AD2d 655). O’Brien, J. P., Joy, Florio and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 A.D.2d 606, 707 N.Y.S.2d 336, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4271, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/avis-rent-a-car-systems-inc-v-anderson-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack