Commerce & Industry Insurance v. Weber

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Commerce & Industry Insurance v. Weber

240 A.D.2d 742, 660 N.Y.S.2d 1001, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7130

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

DecidedJune 30, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 240 A.D.2d 742 (Commerce & Industry Insurance v. Weber) 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

Commerce & Industry Insurance v. Weber, 240 A.D.2d 742, 660 N.Y.S.2d 1001, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7130 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to permanently stay arbitration of an underinsured motorist claim pursuant to CPLR article 75, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Tanenbaum, J.), dated July 23, 1996, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the petition is granted.

The offset provision relied upon by the petitioner insurance carrier is enforceable because the policy contains a single, combined limit of uninsurance /underinsurance covered by one premium and a combined endorsement for uninsured and underinsured coverage (see, Matter of Nationwide Ins. Co. v Ohrablo, 236 AD2d 541; Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. [Stolarz— [743]*743N. J. Mfrs. Ins. Co.], 81 NY2d 219, 223, 230; Matter of Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v Damaskinos, 238 AD2d 511; Matter of Nationwide Ins. Co. [Winn], 215 AD2d 958). Moreover, because the amount which the respondent received from the tortfeasor’s insurer exceeds the amount of underinsured motorist benefits provided under the subject policy, the petitioner is entitled to a permanent stay of arbitration of the respondent’s claim (see, Matter of Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v Damaskinos, supra). Miller, J. P., Thompson, Joy and Luciano, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to permanently stay arbitration of an underinsured motorist claim pursuant to CPLR article 75, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Tanenbaum, J.), dated July 23, 1996, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the petition is granted.

The offset provision relied upon by the petitioner insurance carrier is enforceable because the policy contains a single, combined limit of uninsurance /underinsurance covered by one premium and a combined endorsement for uninsured and underinsured coverage (see, Matter of Nationwide Ins. Co. v Ohrablo, 236 AD2d 541; Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. [Stolarz— [743]*743N. J. Mfrs. Ins. Co.], 81 NY2d 219, 223, 230; Matter of Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v Damaskinos, 238 AD2d 511; Matter of Nationwide Ins. Co. [Winn], 215 AD2d 958). Moreover, because the amount which the respondent received from the tortfeasor’s insurer exceeds the amount of underinsured motorist benefits provided under the subject policy, the petitioner is entitled to a permanent stay of arbitration of the respondent’s claim (see, Matter of Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v Damaskinos, supra). Miller, J. P., Thompson, Joy and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

240 A.D.2d 742, 660 N.Y.S.2d 1001, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7130, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commerce-industry-insurance-v-weber-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack