In re the Arbitration between Liberty Mutual Insurance & Perry

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Arbitration between Liberty Mutual Insurance & Perry

50 A.D.2d 781, 377 N.Y.S.2d 72, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11584

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

DecidedDecember 18, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 50 A.D.2d 781 (In re the Arbitration between Liberty Mutual Insurance & Perry) 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 Liberty Mutual Insurance & Perry, 50 A.D.2d 781, 377 N.Y.S.2d 72, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11584 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

— Judgment entered in the Supreme Court, New York County, on June 21, 1974 granting petitioner’s application for a permanent stay of arbitration unanimously affirmed, with $40 costs and disbursements to petitioner-respondent. Reversible error was not committed in the exclusion of the Florida police report since the report was not supported by the testimony of either the police officer who prepared it or by Kenneth Johnson, who allegedly made the statements contained in the report. (See Yeargans v Yeargans, 24 AD2d 280 and cases therein cited.) The trial court’s finding that respondent State Farm Mutual Insurance Company failed to prove that the vehicle of its assured was a stolen vehicle at the time of the accident is supported by the evidence and not contrary thereto as urged by appellant. Concur — Stevens, P. J., Kupferman, Lupiano, Lane and Nunez, JJ.

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

— Judgment entered in the Supreme Court, New York County, on June 21, 1974 granting petitioner’s application for a permanent stay of arbitration unanimously affirmed, with $40 costs and disbursements to petitioner-respondent. Reversible error was not committed in the exclusion of the Florida police report since the report was not supported by the testimony of either the police officer who prepared it or by Kenneth Johnson, who allegedly made the statements contained in the report. (See Yeargans v Yeargans, 24 AD2d 280 and cases therein cited.) The trial court’s finding that respondent State Farm Mutual Insurance Company failed to prove that the vehicle of its assured was a stolen vehicle at the time of the accident is supported by the evidence and not contrary thereto as urged by appellant. Concur — Stevens, P. J., Kupferman, Lupiano, Lane and Nunez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 A.D.2d 781, 377 N.Y.S.2d 72, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11584, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-arbitration-between-liberty-mutual-insurance-perry-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack