Federal Insurance v. Rivers

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Federal Insurance v. Rivers

73 A.D.2d 690, 423 N.Y.S.2d 844, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14560

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

DecidedDecember 31, 1979

StatusPublished

This text of 73 A.D.2d 690 (Federal Insurance v. Rivers) 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

Federal Insurance v. Rivers, 73 A.D.2d 690, 423 N.Y.S.2d 844, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14560 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a proceeding to stay arbitration, petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated July 17, 1979, which denied its application to stay arbitration and directed the parties to proceed to arbitration. Judgment reversed, without costs or disbursements, and proceeding remitted to Trial Term for a hearing and new determination in accordance herewith. Trial Term had two questions referred to it for determination. Upon receiving a concession on the issue of coverage, it made its determination on the issue of timeliness on the papers before it and without conducting an evidentiary hearing. This was error. Insofar as it appears on the present record, the court should have conducted a hearing on the issue of the timeliness of petitioner’s application to stay arbitration as per the order of Special Term* referring the matter to Trial Term for determination. Mollen, P. J., Titone, Rabin, Gulotta and Gibbons, JJ., concur.

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

— In a proceeding to stay arbitration, petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated July 17, 1979, which denied its application to stay arbitration and directed the parties to proceed to arbitration. Judgment reversed, without costs or disbursements, and proceeding remitted to Trial Term for a hearing and new determination in accordance herewith. Trial Term had two questions referred to it for determination. Upon receiving a concession on the issue of coverage, it made its determination on the issue of timeliness on the papers before it and without conducting an evidentiary hearing. This was error. Insofar as it appears on the present record, the court should have conducted a hearing on the issue of the timeliness of petitioner’s application to stay arbitration as per the order of Special Term* referring the matter to Trial Term for determination. Mollen, P. J., Titone, Rabin, Gulotta and Gibbons, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

73 A.D.2d 690, 423 N.Y.S.2d 844, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14560, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/federal-insurance-v-rivers-nyappdiv-1979.