Kane v. Fiduciary Insurance Co. of America

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kane v. Fiduciary Insurance Co. of America

114 A.D.3d 405, 980 N.Y.S.2d 72

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

DecidedFebruary 4, 2014

StatusPublished

This text of 114 A.D.3d 405 (Kane v. Fiduciary Insurance Co. of America) 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

Kane v. Fiduciary Insurance Co. of America, 114 A.D.3d 405, 980 N.Y.S.2d 72 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol E. Huff, J.), entered April 30, 2012, which granted the petition to vacate the arbitration awards, and remanded the matter for a new arbitration before a new arbitrator, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the arbitration awards reinstated.

The arbitral awards, rendered in compulsory arbitration, were not irrational or contrary to settled law, and therefore should have been confirmed. Respondent insurer’s disclaimer, based strictly upon primacy of coverage, was not so absolute or unequivocal as to constitute a repudiation of the policy (see Seward Park Hous. Corp. v Greater N.Y. Mut. Ins. Co., 43 AD3d 23, 30 [1st Dept 2007]). The arbitrators were therefore correct that petitioner was required, but failed, to comply with the conditions precedent to coverage found in the implementing no-fault regulations. He did not submit timely written proof of claim to the insurer, including the particulars regarding the nature and extent of the injuries and treatment received and contemplated (11 NYCRR 65-1.1, 65-2.4 [c]).

We have considered the parties’ remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Friedman, J.P, Acosta, Renwick, Manzanet-Daniels and Gische, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol E. Huff, J.), entered April 30, 2012, which granted the petition to vacate the arbitration awards, and remanded the matter for a new arbitration before a new arbitrator, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the arbitration awards reinstated.

The arbitral awards, rendered in compulsory arbitration, were not irrational or contrary to settled law, and therefore should have been confirmed. Respondent insurer’s disclaimer, based strictly upon primacy of coverage, was not so absolute or unequivocal as to constitute a repudiation of the policy (see Seward Park Hous. Corp. v Greater N.Y. Mut. Ins. Co., 43 AD3d 23, 30 [1st Dept 2007]). The arbitrators were therefore correct that petitioner was required, but failed, to comply with the conditions precedent to coverage found in the implementing no-fault regulations. He did not submit timely written proof of claim to the insurer, including the particulars regarding the nature and extent of the injuries and treatment received and contemplated (11 NYCRR 65-1.1, 65-2.4 [c]).

We have considered the parties’ remaining arguments and find them unavailing. Concur — Friedman, J.P, Acosta, Renwick, Manzanet-Daniels and Gische, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

114 A.D.3d 405, 980 N.Y.S.2d 72, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kane-v-fiduciary-insurance-co-of-america-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack