In re the Arbitration between Sefcik & Allstate Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Arbitration between Sefcik & Allstate Insurance

229 A.D.2d 1031, 645 N.Y.S.2d 184, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9163

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

DecidedJuly 12, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 229 A.D.2d 1031 (In re the Arbitration between Sefcik & Allstate Insurance) 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 Sefcik & Allstate Insurance, 229 A.D.2d 1031, 645 N.Y.S.2d 184, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9163 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, petition denied, cross petition granted and award vacated. Memorandum: Petitioner submitted a claim to respondent, his insurance carrier, for underinsurance benefits. The parties submitted the claim to arbitration under the rules of the American Arbitration Association, in accordance with the policy. The arbitrator awarded $65,000 to petitioner, who commenced this proceeding to confirm that award.

Supreme Court erred in denying respondent’s cross petition seeking to vacate the award and to schedule a trial de novo. The policy provides that, if an award exceeds the financial responsibility limits required in New York, which at the time were $10,000, either party has the right to a trial de novo on all issues. There is no merit to the contention that respondent, by proceeding to arbitration in accordance with the policy provisions, waived its right to a trial de novo (see, Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. v Hendricks, 226 AD2d 527; Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v Fennimore, 224 AD2d 402). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Richmond County, Amann, Jr., J.— Arbitration.) Present—Pine, J. P., Fallon, Callahan, Balio and Boehm, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, petition denied, cross petition granted and award vacated. Memorandum: Petitioner submitted a claim to respondent, his insurance carrier, for underinsurance benefits. The parties submitted the claim to arbitration under the rules of the American Arbitration Association, in accordance with the policy. The arbitrator awarded $65,000 to petitioner, who commenced this proceeding to confirm that award.

Supreme Court erred in denying respondent’s cross petition seeking to vacate the award and to schedule a trial de novo. The policy provides that, if an award exceeds the financial responsibility limits required in New York, which at the time were $10,000, either party has the right to a trial de novo on all issues. There is no merit to the contention that respondent, by proceeding to arbitration in accordance with the policy provisions, waived its right to a trial de novo (see, Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. v Hendricks, 226 AD2d 527; Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v Fennimore, 224 AD2d 402). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Richmond County, Amann, Jr., J.— Arbitration.) Present—Pine, J. P., Fallon, Callahan, Balio and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

229 A.D.2d 1031, 645 N.Y.S.2d 184, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9163, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-arbitration-between-sefcik-allstate-insurance-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack