In re the Arbitration between Travelers Property Casualty Corp. & Hershman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re the Arbitration between Travelers Property Casualty Corp. & Hershman

287 A.D.2d 412, 732 N.Y.S.2d 3, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10096

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

DecidedOctober 30, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 287 A.D.2d 412 (In re the Arbitration between Travelers Property Casualty Corp. & Hershman) 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 Travelers Property Casualty Corp. & Hershman, 287 A.D.2d 412, 732 N.Y.S.2d 3, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10096 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (William Wetzel, J.), entered August 8, 2000, which granted the petition pursuant to CPLR article 75 to permanently stay arbitration of respondent’s claim for underinsured motorist benefits, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Even if not timely pursuant to CPLR 7503 (c), the petition was nonetheless properly entertained by Supreme Court under the “no agreement to arbitrate” exception to CPLR 7503 (c) (see, Matter of Matarasso [Continental Cas. Co.], 56 NY2d 264, 267). Respondent was not a party to any arbitration agreement permitting arbitration of his claim for underinsured motorist benefits, the relevant agreement to arbitrate having been solely between petitioner Travelers and its corporate insured, Manhattan Orthopedics, P. C. The Travelers’ policies at issue did not provide coverage for the underinsured motorist claims of respondent, the son of the officers and/or shareholders of Manhattan Orthopedics, P. C. who, while a pedestrian, was injured when struck by a vehicle that jumped a curb (see, Buckner v Motor Vehicle Acc. Indem. Corp., 66 NY2d 211, 212-214). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Tom, Ellerin and Buckley, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (William Wetzel, J.), entered August 8, 2000, which granted the petition pursuant to CPLR article 75 to permanently stay arbitration of respondent’s claim for underinsured motorist benefits, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Even if not timely pursuant to CPLR 7503 (c), the petition was nonetheless properly entertained by Supreme Court under the “no agreement to arbitrate” exception to CPLR 7503 (c) (see, Matter of Matarasso [Continental Cas. Co.], 56 NY2d 264, 267). Respondent was not a party to any arbitration agreement permitting arbitration of his claim for underinsured motorist benefits, the relevant agreement to arbitrate having been solely between petitioner Travelers and its corporate insured, Manhattan Orthopedics, P. C. The Travelers’ policies at issue did not provide coverage for the underinsured motorist claims of respondent, the son of the officers and/or shareholders of Manhattan Orthopedics, P. C. who, while a pedestrian, was injured when struck by a vehicle that jumped a curb (see, Buckner v Motor Vehicle Acc. Indem. Corp., 66 NY2d 211, 212-214). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Tom, Ellerin and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

287 A.D.2d 412, 732 N.Y.S.2d 3, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10096, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-arbitration-between-travelers-property-casualty-corp-hershman-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack