Hurwich v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hurwich v. New York City Transit Authority

69 A.D.2d 883, 415 N.Y.S.2d 693, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11615

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

DecidedApril 23, 1979

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 69 A.D.2d 883 (Hurwich v. New York City Transit Authority) 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

Hurwich v. New York City Transit Authority, 69 A.D.2d 883, 415 N.Y.S.2d 693, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11615 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding to vacate an arbitrator’s award which denied petitioner’s claim for no-fault benefits under the New York Comprehensive Automobile Insurance Reparations Act, the New York City Transit Authority appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered September 28, 1978, which granted the application, vacated the award, determined that petitioner is entitled to no-fault benefits and an attorney’s fee and denied the authority’s cross motion to confirm the award. Judgment reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, application denied and cross motion granted. In view of the claimant’s testimony that she was completely "off the bus” at the time she fell, we cannot say that the arbitrator’s decision was "so irrational as to warrant vacatur” (see Matter of Garcia v Federal Ins. Co., 46 NY2d 1040, 1041). Damiani, J. P., Titone, Margett and Mangano, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to vacate an arbitrator’s award which denied petitioner’s claim for no-fault benefits under the New York Comprehensive Automobile Insurance Reparations Act, the New York City Transit Authority appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered September 28, 1978, which granted the application, vacated the award, determined that petitioner is entitled to no-fault benefits and an attorney’s fee and denied the authority’s cross motion to confirm the award. Judgment reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, application denied and cross motion granted. In view of the claimant’s testimony that she was completely "off the bus” at the time she fell, we cannot say that the arbitrator’s decision was "so irrational as to warrant vacatur” (see Matter of Garcia v Federal Ins. Co., 46 NY2d 1040, 1041). Damiani, J. P., Titone, Margett and Mangano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

69 A.D.2d 883, 415 N.Y.S.2d 693, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11615, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hurwich-v-new-york-city-transit-authority-nyappdiv-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack