Matter of Fiduciary Ins. Co. of Am. v. Greenidge

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matter of Fiduciary Ins. Co. of Am. v. Greenidge

2017 NY Slip Op 1353, 147 A.D.3d 1050, 48 N.Y.S.3d 219

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

DecidedFebruary 22, 2017

Docket2015-00817

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 1353 (Matter of Fiduciary Ins. Co. of Am. v. Greenidge) 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

Matter of Fiduciary Ins. Co. of Am. v. Greenidge, 2017 NY Slip Op 1353, 147 A.D.3d 1050, 48 N.Y.S.3d 219 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

*1051 In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75, inter alia, to permanently stay arbitration of a claim for supplementary uninsured motorist benefits, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Kangs County (Sunshine, Ct. Atty. Ref.), dated November 17, 2014, which, after a framed-issue hearing, granted that branch of the petition which was to permanently stay arbitration.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, that branch of the petition which was to permanently stay arbitration is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed.

The petitioner commenced this proceeding to stay arbitration of a claim for supplementary uninsured motorist benefits that was made by its insured, Renny Greenidge. Greenidge’s claim arose out of an automobile accident that occurred when his vehicle was struck by another vehicle. The other vehicle (hereinafter the hit-and-run vehicle) did not stay at the scene of the accident. After a framed-issue hearing, the Supreme Court granted that branch of the petition which was to permanently stay arbitration. We reverse.

“An insurance carrier seeking to stay the arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim has the burden of establishing that the offending vehicle was insured at the time of the accident” (Matter of American Home Assur. Co. v Wai Ip Wong, 249 AD2d 301, 301 [1998]; see Matter of Eagle Ins. Co. v Pusey, 271 AD2d 445, 445-446 [2000]). “Once such a prima facie case of coverage is established, the burden shifts to the opposing party to come forward with evidence to the contrary” (Matter of American Home Assur. Co. v Wai Ip Wong, 249 AD2d at 301; see Matter of Eagle Ins. Co. v Patrik, 233 AD2d 327, 328 [1996]).

Here, the admissible evidence submitted by the petitioner at the framed-issue hearing failed to establish, prima facie, the existence of insurance coverage for the hit-and-run vehicle at the time of the subject accident (see Matter of Eagle Ins. Co. v Pusey, 271 AD2d at 445-446; Matter of American Home Assur. Co. v Wai Ip Wong, 249 AD2d 301 [1998]; see also 11 NYCRR 60-2.3; cf. Matter of Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v McDonald, 6 AD3d 614, 615 [2004]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have denied that branch of the petition which was to permanently stay arbitration and dismissed the proceeding.

Mastro, J.P., Austin, Miller and Maltese, JJ., concur.

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

*1051 In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75, inter alia, to permanently stay arbitration of a claim for supplementary uninsured motorist benefits, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Kangs County (Sunshine, Ct. Atty. Ref.), dated November 17, 2014, which, after a framed-issue hearing, granted that branch of the petition which was to permanently stay arbitration.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, that branch of the petition which was to permanently stay arbitration is denied, and the proceeding is dismissed.

The petitioner commenced this proceeding to stay arbitration of a claim for supplementary uninsured motorist benefits that was made by its insured, Renny Greenidge. Greenidge’s claim arose out of an automobile accident that occurred when his vehicle was struck by another vehicle. The other vehicle (hereinafter the hit-and-run vehicle) did not stay at the scene of the accident. After a framed-issue hearing, the Supreme Court granted that branch of the petition which was to permanently stay arbitration. We reverse.

“An insurance carrier seeking to stay the arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim has the burden of establishing that the offending vehicle was insured at the time of the accident” (Matter of American Home Assur. Co. v Wai Ip Wong, 249 AD2d 301, 301 [1998]; see Matter of Eagle Ins. Co. v Pusey, 271 AD2d 445, 445-446 [2000]). “Once such a prima facie case of coverage is established, the burden shifts to the opposing party to come forward with evidence to the contrary” (Matter of American Home Assur. Co. v Wai Ip Wong, 249 AD2d at 301; see Matter of Eagle Ins. Co. v Patrik, 233 AD2d 327, 328 [1996]).

Here, the admissible evidence submitted by the petitioner at the framed-issue hearing failed to establish, prima facie, the existence of insurance coverage for the hit-and-run vehicle at the time of the subject accident (see Matter of Eagle Ins. Co. v Pusey, 271 AD2d at 445-446; Matter of American Home Assur. Co. v Wai Ip Wong, 249 AD2d 301 [1998]; see also 11 NYCRR 60-2.3; cf. Matter of Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v McDonald, 6 AD3d 614, 615 [2004]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have denied that branch of the petition which was to permanently stay arbitration and dismissed the proceeding.

Mastro, J.P., Austin, Miller and Maltese, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2017 NY Slip Op 1353, 147 A.D.3d 1050, 48 N.Y.S.3d 219, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matter-of-fiduciary-ins-co-of-am-v-greenidge-nyappdiv-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack