Eagle Insurance v. Beauvil

297 A.D.2d 736, 747 N.Y.2d 774, 747 N.Y.S.2d 774, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8658
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided September 23, 2002·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

[737] The petitioner established a prima facie case as to the existence of insurance coverage for the subject vehicle by producing the police accident report which contained the offending vehicle’s insurance code (see Matter of Centennial Ins. Co. v Capehart, 220 AD2d 499; Matter of Wausau Ins. Co. v Ramos, 151 AD2d 487). The appellant, the offending vehicle’s alleged carrier, submitted a letter stating in conclusory fashion that it did not insure the offending vehicle. This was insufficient to overcome the petitioner’s prima facie case (see Matter of Eagle Ins. Co. v Sadiq, 237 AD2d 605). The Supreme Court, therefore, properly permanently stayed uninsured motorist arbitration. Altman, J.P., S. Miller, McGinity, Schmidt and Rivera, JJ., concur.

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

Eagle Insurance v. Beauvil, 297 A.D.2d 736, 747 N.Y.2d 774, 747 N.Y.S.2d 774, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8658 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

297 A.D.2d 736 (Eagle Insurance v. Beauvil) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mercury Insurance Group v. Ocana
46 A.D.3d 561 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Utica Mutual Insurance v. Colon
25 A.D.3d 617 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Eagle Insurance v. Rodriguez
15 A.D.3d 399 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Liberty Mutual Insurance v. McDonald
6 A.D.3d 614 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)