In re the Arbitration between Balbierz & Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnfication Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Arbitration between Balbierz & Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnfication Corp.

28 A.D.2d 968, 283 N.Y.S.2d 325, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3397

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

DecidedSeptember 21, 1967

StatusPublished

This text of 28 A.D.2d 968 (In re the Arbitration between Balbierz & Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnfication Corp.) 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

In re the Arbitration between Balbierz & Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnfication Corp., 28 A.D.2d 968, 283 N.Y.S.2d 325, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3397 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum: We agree with the conclusion of Special Term but do not adopt its reasoning. Matter of Korzeniewski (MVAIC) (24 A D 2d 541) and similar cases relied on by Special Term, considered the timeliness of notice where the insurer of a motorist disclaimed subsequent to the accident. Here respondent’s claim against appellant is based upon the fact that the motorist who committed the .alleged tortious act was uninsured. We find, however, that respondent did give notice “as soon as practicable” within the meaning of the policy provision. (Cf. Matter of Stroud [MVAIC], 26 Misc 2d 960, affd. 13 A D 2d 757.) (Appeal from order [969]*969of Erie Special Term denying motion to stay arbitration.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Del Veeehio and Marsh, JJ.

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

Memorandum: We agree with the conclusion of Special Term but do not adopt its reasoning. Matter of Korzeniewski (MVAIC) (24 A D 2d 541) and similar cases relied on by Special Term, considered the timeliness of notice where the insurer of a motorist disclaimed subsequent to the accident. Here respondent’s claim against appellant is based upon the fact that the motorist who committed the .alleged tortious act was uninsured. We find, however, that respondent did give notice “as soon as practicable” within the meaning of the policy provision. (Cf. Matter of Stroud [MVAIC], 26 Misc 2d 960, affd. 13 A D 2d 757.) (Appeal from order [969]*969of Erie Special Term denying motion to stay arbitration.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Del Veeehio and Marsh, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

28 A.D.2d 968, 283 N.Y.S.2d 325, 1967 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3397, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-arbitration-between-balbierz-motor-vehicle-accident-nyappdiv-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack