Hartford Insurance v. Khan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hartford Insurance v. Khan

279 A.D.2d 524, 718 N.Y.S.2d 872, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 373

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 16, 2001·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

In a [525] proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to permanently stay arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Shaughnessy, J.H.O.), dated May 9, 2000, which, after a hearing, granted the petition and permanently stayed arbitration.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

It is well settled that the determination of the fact-finding court should not be disturbed on appeal unless it could not have been reached by any fair interpretation of the evidence, particularly in cases resting in large part on the credibility of witnesses (see, Thoreson v Penthouse Intl., 80 NY2d 490; Matter of Tri-State Consumer Ins. Co. v Dabush, 264 AD2d 848; Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. v McMahon, 251 AD2d 571; Matter of Aetna Life & Cas. v Gramazio, 242 AD2d 530). The determination that there was no physical contact between the appellant’s vehicle and an unidentified vehicle is supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence. O’Brien, J. P., Krausman, Gold-stein and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

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

In a [525] proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to permanently stay arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Shaughnessy, J.H.O.), dated May 9, 2000, which, after a hearing, granted the petition and permanently stayed arbitration.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

It is well settled that the determination of the fact-finding court should not be disturbed on appeal unless it could not have been reached by any fair interpretation of the evidence, particularly in cases resting in large part on the credibility of witnesses (see, Thoreson v Penthouse Intl., 80 NY2d 490; Matter of Tri-State Consumer Ins. Co. v Dabush, 264 AD2d 848; Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. v McMahon, 251 AD2d 571; Matter of Aetna Life & Cas. v Gramazio, 242 AD2d 530). The determination that there was no physical contact between the appellant’s vehicle and an unidentified vehicle is supported by a fair interpretation of the evidence. O’Brien, J. P., Krausman, Gold-stein and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Hartford Insurance v. Khan, 279 A.D.2d 524, 718 N.Y.S.2d 872, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 373 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

279 A.D.2d 524 (Hartford Insurance v. Khan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related