Continental Insurance v. Lulanaj

33 A.D.3d 614, 822 N.Y.S.2d 450
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 3, 2006·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

a proceeding pursuant to CFLR article 75 to stay an uninsured motorist arbitration, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Spodek, J.), dated July 27, 2005, which, in effect, denied that branch of the petition which was to permanently stay the arbitration.

[615] Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The additional respondent Utica Mutual Insurance Company demonstrated that it met the requirements set forth in Thrasher v United States Liab. Ins. Co. (19 NY2d 159, 168-169 [1967]) to disclaim coverage on the ground of lack of cooperation of its insured, Paldo Express (see Allstate Ins. Co. v United Intl. Ins. Co., 16 AD3d 605 [2005]). Accordingly, the Paldo Express vehicle was uninsured and, as such, the Supreme Court properly, in effect, denied that branch of the petition which was to permanently stay arbitration of the claim for uninsured motorist benefits. Schmidt, J.P, Adams, Luciano and Lifson, JJ., concur.

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

Continental Insurance v. Lulanaj, 33 A.D.3d 614, 822 N.Y.S.2d 450 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

33 A.D.3d 614 (Continental Insurance v. Lulanaj) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

General Assurance Co. v. Garcia
37 A.D.3d 466 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)