Insurance Company of North America v. Jiminez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Insurance Company of North America v. Jiminez

156 A.D.2d 561, 550 N.Y.S.2d 831, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15971

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

DecidedDecember 18, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 156 A.D.2d 561 (Insurance Company of North America v. Jiminez) 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

Insurance Company of North America v. Jiminez, 156 A.D.2d 561, 550 N.Y.S.2d 831, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15971 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to stay arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Christ, J.), dated October 6, 1989, which, after a hearing, dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The evidence adduced at the hearing was sufficient to establish that the bill sent to the insured strictly complied with the billing procedures set forth by rules of New York Automobile Insurance Plan § 14 (E) (2) (cf., Matter of Home Indem. Co. v Scricca, 147 AD2d 697; Eveready Ins. Co. v Mitchell, 133 AD2d 210). As the petitioner conceded that the cancellation notice met the requirements of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 313, and the mailing thereof was duly established, the hearing court properly dismissed the proceeding to stay arbitration. Brown, J. P., Kunzeman, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to stay arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Christ, J.), dated October 6, 1989, which, after a hearing, dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The evidence adduced at the hearing was sufficient to establish that the bill sent to the insured strictly complied with the billing procedures set forth by rules of New York Automobile Insurance Plan § 14 (E) (2) (cf., Matter of Home Indem. Co. v Scricca, 147 AD2d 697; Eveready Ins. Co. v Mitchell, 133 AD2d 210). As the petitioner conceded that the cancellation notice met the requirements of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 313, and the mailing thereof was duly established, the hearing court properly dismissed the proceeding to stay arbitration. Brown, J. P., Kunzeman, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

156 A.D.2d 561, 550 N.Y.S.2d 831, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 15971, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/insurance-company-of-north-america-v-jiminez-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack