ELRAC, Inc. v. Suero

38 A.D.3d 544, 831 N.Y.S.2d 475
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 6, 2007
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 38 A.D.3d 544 (ELRAC, Inc. v. Suero) 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
ELRAC, Inc. v. Suero, 38 A.D.3d 544, 831 N.Y.S.2d 475 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CFLR article 75 to permanently stay arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rios, J.), entered July 13, 2006, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The respondents were passengers in a vehicle owned by the petitioner, ELRAC, Inc., doing business as Enterprise Rent a Car (hereinafter ELRAC), a self-insured car rental company, and operated by a nonparty to whom the vehicle had been rented. The subject vehicle was involved in a collision with an uninsured motorist and, approximately SVa years later, the [545]*545respondents served ELRAC with a demand for arbitration. ELRAC commenced this proceeding to permanently stay arbitration on the ground that the demand for arbitration was time-barred under the applicable three-year statute of limitations (see CPLR 214 [2]). The Supreme Court, upon determining that the claim was governed by the six-year statute of limitations contained in CPLR 213 (2), denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding. We affirm.

From an injured claimant’s perspective, “[t]he right to obtain uninsured motorist protection from a self-insurer is no less than the corresponding right under a policy issued by an insurer” (Matter of Country-Wide Ins. Co. [Manning], 96 AD2d 471, 472 [1983], affd 62 NY2d 748 [1984]; see Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. v Shaw, 52 NY2d 818, 820 [1980]). ELRAC contends that while an injured claimant unquestionably has six years to assert an uninsured motorist claim against an insured owner’s carrier (see e.g. Jenkins v State Farm Ins. Co., 21 AD3d 529, 530 [2005]), that person has only three years to assert an identical claim against a self-insured owner. We disagree. The respondents’ claim for uninsured motorist benefits against a self-insured vehicle owner, while statutorily mandated, remains “contractual rather than statutory in nature” (Matter of Manhattan & Bronx Surface Tr. Operating Auth. v Evans, 95 AD2d 470, 472 [1983]; cf. Matter of De Luca [Motor Veh. Acc. Indem. Corp.], 17 NY2d 76, 79 [1966]) and, as such, is subject to the six-year statute of limitations (see Matter of New York City Health & Hosps. Corp. [Degorter], 133 Misc 2d 93, 97 [1986]). Accordingly, the petition was properly denied, and the proceeding was properly dismissed. Crane, J.P, Krausman, Fisher and Dickerson, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Contact Chiropractic, P.C. v. New York City Tr. Auth.
31 N.Y.3d 187 (New York Court of Appeals, 2018)
Contact Chiropractic, P.C. v. N.Y.C. Transit Auth.
99 N.E.3d 867 (Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors, 2018)
Contact Chiropractic, P.C. v. New York City Transit Authority
135 A.D.3d 804 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Matter of New York City Tr. Auth. v. Powell
126 A.D.3d 705 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Contact Chiropractic, P.C. v. New York City Transit Authority
42 Misc. 3d 60 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
New York City Transit Authority v. Hill
107 A.D.3d 897 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Denise v. New York City Transit Authority
25 Misc. 3d 13 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Spring World Acupuncture, P.C. v. NYC Transit Authority
24 Misc. 3d 39 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Bloom v. St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc.
57 A.D.3d 819 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Pinnacle Open MRI, P.C. v. Republic Western Insurance
18 Misc. 3d 626 (Nassau County District Court, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
38 A.D.3d 544, 831 N.Y.S.2d 475, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/elrac-inc-v-suero-nyappdiv-2007.