In re the Arbitration between Rosenblum & Government Employees Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Arbitration between Rosenblum & Government Employees Insurance

50 A.D.2d 607, 375 N.Y.S.2d 387, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12395

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 24, 1975·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

— In a proceeding to stay arbitration, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated May 2, 1975, which granted the application. Order reversed, on the law, with $50 costs and disbursements, and petition dismissed on the merits. The use of the word "claimant” in subdivision 2 of section 675 of the Insurance Law, as well as the wording employed in the approved form arbitration clause to be incorporated in minimum "no-fault” insurance coverage (see 11 NYCRR 65.2) evidences the Legislature’s intent to permit assignees of medical claims against insurance carriers pursuant to the "no-fault” scheme to avail themselves of the right the assignors might have to binding arbitration on disputed claims. Nothing in the wording of the statute or in the public policy of the State would appear to preclude such a statutory construction. Rabin, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Latham, Margett and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

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

— In a proceeding to stay arbitration, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated May 2, 1975, which granted the application. Order reversed, on the law, with $50 costs and disbursements, and petition dismissed on the merits. The use of the word "claimant” in subdivision 2 of section 675 of the Insurance Law, as well as the wording employed in the approved form arbitration clause to be incorporated in minimum "no-fault” insurance coverage (see 11 NYCRR 65.2) evidences the Legislature’s intent to permit assignees of medical claims against insurance carriers pursuant to the "no-fault” scheme to avail themselves of the right the assignors might have to binding arbitration on disputed claims. Nothing in the wording of the statute or in the public policy of the State would appear to preclude such a statutory construction. Rabin, Acting P. J., Martuscello, Latham, Margett and Shapiro, JJ., concur.

In re the Arbitration between Rosenblum & Government Employees Insurance, 50 A.D.2d 607, 375 N.Y.S.2d 387, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12395 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

50 A.D.2d 607 (In re the Arbitration between Rosenblum & Government Employees Insurance) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related