Nationwide Insurance v. Kuchta

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Nationwide Insurance v. Kuchta

238 A.D.2d 510, 657 N.Y.S.2d 927, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4010

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

DecidedApril 21, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 238 A.D.2d 510 (Nationwide Insurance v. Kuchta) 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

Nationwide Insurance v. Kuchta, 238 A.D.2d 510, 657 N.Y.S.2d 927, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4010 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 for a permanent stay of arbitration of an underinsured motorist claim, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Roberto, J.), dated March 22, 1996, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the petition is granted, and arbitration is permanently stayed.

The policy at issue contains a single combined limit of uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage of $10,000. The petitioner was entitled to an offset of $10,000, which is the [511]*511amount that the respondent recovered from the tortfeasor (see, Matter of Deckaj v State Farm Mut. Ins. Co., 230 AD2d 735; Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. [Stolarz-N.J. Mfrs. Ins. Co.], 81 NY2d 219; Matter of Nationwide Ins. Co. v Ohrablo, 236 AD2d 541; Matter of Lotito v Metropolitan Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 228 AD2d 443; Matter of Nationwide Ins. Co. [Winn], 215 AD2d 958; Matter of Zurich Ins. Co. v Wilburn, 212 AD2d 620). Since the respondent has exhausted his policy limit, there is nothing to arbitrate (see, Matter of Lotito v Metropolitan Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., supra). Miller, J. P., Thompson, Joy and Luciano, 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 for a permanent stay of arbitration of an underinsured motorist claim, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Roberto, J.), dated March 22, 1996, which denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the petition is granted, and arbitration is permanently stayed.

The policy at issue contains a single combined limit of uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage of $10,000. The petitioner was entitled to an offset of $10,000, which is the [511]*511amount that the respondent recovered from the tortfeasor (see, Matter of Deckaj v State Farm Mut. Ins. Co., 230 AD2d 735; Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. [Stolarz-N.J. Mfrs. Ins. Co.], 81 NY2d 219; Matter of Nationwide Ins. Co. v Ohrablo, 236 AD2d 541; Matter of Lotito v Metropolitan Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 228 AD2d 443; Matter of Nationwide Ins. Co. [Winn], 215 AD2d 958; Matter of Zurich Ins. Co. v Wilburn, 212 AD2d 620). Since the respondent has exhausted his policy limit, there is nothing to arbitrate (see, Matter of Lotito v Metropolitan Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., supra). Miller, J. P., Thompson, Joy and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

238 A.D.2d 510, 657 N.Y.S.2d 927, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4010, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nationwide-insurance-v-kuchta-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack