In re the Arbitration between Metropolitan Property & Casualty Insurance Co. & Hollingsworth

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Arbitration between Metropolitan Property & Casualty Insurance Co. & Hollingsworth

247 A.D.2d 921, 668 N.Y.S.2d 785, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1280

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 4, 1998·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted the petition seeking a stay of underinsurance arbitration. Pursuant to the uninsured motorist coverage section of the policy, petitioner is entitled to offset the amount recovered by respondent in settlement of the underlying personal injury action (see, Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. [Stolarz-N. J. Mfrs. Ins. Co.], 81 NY2d 219, 223; Matter of Lotito v Metropolitan Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 228 AD2d 443). We reject respondent’s contention that petitioner is not entitled to enforce the offset provision on the ground that the policy sets forth underinsured motorist coverage in a separate endorsement (see, Matter of New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co. [McGill], 244 AD2d 865; Matter of Nationwide Ins. Co. [Winn], 215 AD2d 958, lv denied 87 NY2d 807). The policy expressly incorporates the underinsured motorist coverage endorsement into the uninsured motorist coverage section (see, Matter of Nationwide Ins. Co. [Winn], supra, at 959). Further, “[t]he dispositive issue is whether there is a single combined limit of uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage, not whether there is a single endorsement” (Matter of New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co. [McGill], supra, at 866). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Herkimer County, Parker, J. — Arbitration.)

Present — Green, J. P., Lawton, Wisner, Callahan and Fallon, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted the petition seeking a stay of underinsurance arbitration. Pursuant to the uninsured motorist coverage section of the policy, petitioner is entitled to offset the amount recovered by respondent in settlement of the underlying personal injury action (see, Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. [Stolarz-N. J. Mfrs. Ins. Co.], 81 NY2d 219, 223; Matter of Lotito v Metropolitan Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 228 AD2d 443). We reject respondent’s contention that petitioner is not entitled to enforce the offset provision on the ground that the policy sets forth underinsured motorist coverage in a separate endorsement (see, Matter of New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co. [McGill], 244 AD2d 865; Matter of Nationwide Ins. Co. [Winn], 215 AD2d 958, lv denied 87 NY2d 807). The policy expressly incorporates the underinsured motorist coverage endorsement into the uninsured motorist coverage section (see, Matter of Nationwide Ins. Co. [Winn], supra, at 959). Further, “[t]he dispositive issue is whether there is a single combined limit of uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage, not whether there is a single endorsement” (Matter of New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co. [McGill], supra, at 866). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Herkimer County, Parker, J. — Arbitration.)

Present — Green, J. P., Lawton, Wisner, Callahan and Fallon, JJ.

In re the Arbitration between Metropolitan Property & Casualty Insurance Co. & Hollingsworth, 247 A.D.2d 921, 668 N.Y.S.2d 785, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1280 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

247 A.D.2d 921 (In re the Arbitration between Metropolitan Property & Casualty Insurance Co. & Hollingsworth) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related