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

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

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

29 A.D.2d 925, 289 N.Y.S.2d 1, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4311

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

DecidedApril 4, 1968

StatusPublished

This text of 29 A.D.2d 925 (In re the Arbitration between Maresca & 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 Maresca & Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp., 29 A.D.2d 925, 289 N.Y.S.2d 1, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4311 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

Order entered September 7, 1967, herein appealed from, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the motion for a stay of arbitration granted and a hearing directed on the issues raised by appellant as to whether claimant was in fact involved in a hit-and-run accident and whether claimant exercised due diligence to ascertain the identity of the operator of the other car allegedly involved in said accident. The demand for arbitration did not comply with the statutory requirements and accordingly appellant is not barred from seeking a stay of arbitration (CPLR 7503, subd. [e]; Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. [Neithardt], 24 A D 2d 941). Concur —Botein, P. J., Stevens, Eager, McGivern and Rabin, JJ.

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

Order entered September 7, 1967, herein appealed from, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, the motion for a stay of arbitration granted and a hearing directed on the issues raised by appellant as to whether claimant was in fact involved in a hit-and-run accident and whether claimant exercised due diligence to ascertain the identity of the operator of the other car allegedly involved in said accident. The demand for arbitration did not comply with the statutory requirements and accordingly appellant is not barred from seeking a stay of arbitration (CPLR 7503, subd. [e]; Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. [Neithardt], 24 A D 2d 941). Concur —Botein, P. J., Stevens, Eager, McGivern and Rabin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

29 A.D.2d 925, 289 N.Y.S.2d 1, 1968 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4311, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-arbitration-between-maresca-motor-vehicle-accident-nyappdiv-1968.