In re the Arbitration between Gordon & Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Arbitration between Gordon & Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp.

31 A.D.2d 793, 297 N.Y.S.2d 63, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4666

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

DecidedFebruary 6, 1969

StatusPublished

This text of 31 A.D.2d 793 (In re the Arbitration between Gordon & Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification 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 Gordon & Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp., 31 A.D.2d 793, 297 N.Y.S.2d 63, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4666 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, entered June 24, 1968, granting a temporary stay of arbitration to MVAIC, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs and disbursements, and MVAIC’s motion for a permanent stay granted, without costs. The infant claimant was allegedly injured on May 22, 1966, when an automobile in which he was riding and which was being driven by Stern, collided with an automobile driven by Indelieato. The claimants (the infant and his mother) have alleged that they were “insured” persons under the uninsured indemnification indorsement in a policy of insurance issued to the mother on an automobile owned by her. Since the policy referred to was issued subsequent to July 1, 1965, claimants’ relief as “ insured ” persons is against the insurer under said policy and not against MVAIC. (Insurance Law, § 167, subd. 2-a; § 605, subd. [a]; Allstate Ins. Co. v. MVAIC, 30 A D 2d 803.) Furthermore, it appears that an arbitration proceeding was instituted by the claimants as “insured” persons under a liability policy covering the Stem vehicle. Finally, [794]*794the claimants’ alleged status as “qualified persons” is questionable (see Matter of Knickerbocker Ins. Co. [Farson], 22 N Y 2d 554, 559; Allstate Ins. Co. v. MVAIC, supra), and, in any event, they d,o not have an arbitrable claim .against MYAIC. Concur—Eager, J. P., Capozzoli, Markewieh, Rabin and Maeken, JJ.

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

Order, entered June 24, 1968, granting a temporary stay of arbitration to MVAIC, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs and disbursements, and MVAIC’s motion for a permanent stay granted, without costs. The infant claimant was allegedly injured on May 22, 1966, when an automobile in which he was riding and which was being driven by Stern, collided with an automobile driven by Indelieato. The claimants (the infant and his mother) have alleged that they were “insured” persons under the uninsured indemnification indorsement in a policy of insurance issued to the mother on an automobile owned by her. Since the policy referred to was issued subsequent to July 1, 1965, claimants’ relief as “ insured ” persons is against the insurer under said policy and not against MVAIC. (Insurance Law, § 167, subd. 2-a; § 605, subd. [a]; Allstate Ins. Co. v. MVAIC, 30 A D 2d 803.) Furthermore, it appears that an arbitration proceeding was instituted by the claimants as “insured” persons under a liability policy covering the Stem vehicle. Finally, [794]*794the claimants’ alleged status as “qualified persons” is questionable (see Matter of Knickerbocker Ins. Co. [Farson], 22 N Y 2d 554, 559; Allstate Ins. Co. v. MVAIC, supra), and, in any event, they d,o not have an arbitrable claim .against MYAIC. Concur—Eager, J. P., Capozzoli, Markewieh, Rabin and Maeken, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

31 A.D.2d 793, 297 N.Y.S.2d 63, 1969 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4666, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-arbitration-between-gordon-motor-vehicle-accident-nyappdiv-1969.