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

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

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

22 A.D.2d 661, 253 N.Y.S.2d 433, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3008

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

DecidedOctober 22, 1964

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 22 A.D.2d 661 (In re the Arbitration between Kavrecich & 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 Kavrecich & Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp., 22 A.D.2d 661, 253 N.Y.S.2d 433, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3008 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1964).

Pincite

Opinions

Memorandum by the Court. Order and judgment granting respondent’s motion to set aside a jury verdict and directing a verdict on behalf of respondent, and granting a permanent stay of arbitration, reversed on the law and the facts and in the exercise of discretion, and the jury verdict reinstated, without costs. On Friday, March 1, 1963, at about 6:30 p.m. petitioner was struck by a hit and run vehicle. He was taken to a hospital and released at approximately 10:30 p.m. the same night. Petitioner remained in bed the following day. On Sunday, March 3, 1963, at 1:00 p.m. petitioner personally reported the accident to the police. Under petitioner’s insurance policy and under subdivision (b) of section 608 of the Insurance Law petitioner was required to make a report within 24 hours or as soon as reasonably possible. The jury found petitioner had made a report to the police as soon as reasonably possible thus complying with the terms of the policy and the statute. Special and Trial Term erroneously set aside the jury’s verdict and directed a verdict in favor of respondent. Whether or not the report was made as soon as reasonably possible was a factual issue to be decided by the jury. (Matter of MVAIC [Brown], 15 A D 2d 578, app. dsmd. 11 N Y 2d 968.)

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

Memorandum by the Court. Order and judgment granting respondent’s motion to set aside a jury verdict and directing a verdict on behalf of respondent, and granting a permanent stay of arbitration, reversed on the law and the facts and in the exercise of discretion, and the jury verdict reinstated, without costs. On Friday, March 1, 1963, at about 6:30 p.m. petitioner was struck by a hit and run vehicle. He was taken to a hospital and released at approximately 10:30 p.m. the same night. Petitioner remained in bed the following day. On Sunday, March 3, 1963, at 1:00 p.m. petitioner personally reported the accident to the police. Under petitioner’s insurance policy and under subdivision (b) of section 608 of the Insurance Law petitioner was required to make a report within 24 hours or as soon as reasonably possible. The jury found petitioner had made a report to the police as soon as reasonably possible thus complying with the terms of the policy and the statute. Special and Trial Term erroneously set aside the jury’s verdict and directed a verdict in favor of respondent. Whether or not the report was made as soon as reasonably possible was a factual issue to be decided by the jury. (Matter of MVAIC [Brown], 15 A D 2d 578, app. dsmd. 11 N Y 2d 968.)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 A.D.2d 661, 253 N.Y.S.2d 433, 1964 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3008, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-arbitration-between-kavrecich-motor-vehicle-accident-nyappdiv-1964.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack