In re the Arbitration between National Union Fire Insurance & GE Betz, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Arbitration between National Union Fire Insurance & GE Betz, Inc.

13 A.D.3d 122, 786 N.Y.S.2d 54, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15021

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

DecidedDecember 9, 2004

StatusPublished

This text of 13 A.D.3d 122 (In re the Arbitration between National Union Fire Insurance & GE Betz, Inc.) 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 National Union Fire Insurance & GE Betz, Inc., 13 A.D.3d 122, 786 N.Y.S.2d 54, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15021 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Ronald A. Zweibel, J), entered August 12, 2003, which, inter alia, denied petitioner’s motion to compel arbitration and dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The clause in the parties’ cash collateral agreement pursuant to which arbitration is sought limits arbitration to “disputes or differences arising out of the interpretation of [the parties’] Agreement.” It is thus narrow in scope (see Gerling Global Reins. Corp. v Home Ins. Co., 302 AD2d 118 [2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 511 [2003]; Argonaut Ins. Co. v Travelers Ins. Co., 295 AD2d 235, 235-236 [2002]) and does not embrace the instant dispute over which insurance policy should be applied to the settlement of an action brought against respondent by one of its former employees, a matter not involving any dispute or difference over the cash collateral agreement’s interpretation. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Ellerin, Lerner, Marlow and Catterson, JJ.

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

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York County (Ronald A. Zweibel, J), entered August 12, 2003, which, inter alia, denied petitioner’s motion to compel arbitration and dismissed the petition, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The clause in the parties’ cash collateral agreement pursuant to which arbitration is sought limits arbitration to “disputes or differences arising out of the interpretation of [the parties’] Agreement.” It is thus narrow in scope (see Gerling Global Reins. Corp. v Home Ins. Co., 302 AD2d 118 [2002], lv denied 99 NY2d 511 [2003]; Argonaut Ins. Co. v Travelers Ins. Co., 295 AD2d 235, 235-236 [2002]) and does not embrace the instant dispute over which insurance policy should be applied to the settlement of an action brought against respondent by one of its former employees, a matter not involving any dispute or difference over the cash collateral agreement’s interpretation. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Ellerin, Lerner, Marlow and Catterson, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 A.D.3d 122, 786 N.Y.S.2d 54, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15021, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-arbitration-between-national-union-fire-insurance-ge-betz-inc-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack