General Accident Insurance v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

General Accident Insurance v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

149 A.D.2d 706, 540 N.Y.S.2d 701, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5343

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

DecidedApril 24, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 149 A.D.2d 706 (General Accident Insurance v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.) 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

General Accident Insurance v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co., 149 A.D.2d 706, 540 N.Y.S.2d 701, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5343 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to vacate an arbitration award, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mullen, J.), entered January 13, 1988, which denied the application and confirmed the award.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs to the respondent Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

The petitioner failed to establish that its rights were prejudiced by the alleged failure to follow the proper procedure prior to the commencement of the arbitration hearing when an arbitrator died and was replaced (see, CPLR 7511 [b] [1] [iv]; Matter of Cross Props. [Gimbel Bros.], 15 AD2d 913, affd 12 NY2d 806). Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Brown and Harwood, JJ., concur.

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

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to vacate an arbitration award, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mullen, J.), entered January 13, 1988, which denied the application and confirmed the award.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs to the respondent Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

The petitioner failed to establish that its rights were prejudiced by the alleged failure to follow the proper procedure prior to the commencement of the arbitration hearing when an arbitrator died and was replaced (see, CPLR 7511 [b] [1] [iv]; Matter of Cross Props. [Gimbel Bros.], 15 AD2d 913, affd 12 NY2d 806). Thompson, J. P., Bracken, Brown and Harwood, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

149 A.D.2d 706, 540 N.Y.S.2d 701, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5343, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/general-accident-insurance-v-aetna-casualty-surety-co-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack