Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Damaskinos

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Damaskinos

238 A.D.2d 511, 657 N.Y.S.2d 928, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3997

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 511 (Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. Damaskinos) 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 Mutual Insurance v. Damaskinos, 238 A.D.2d 511, 657 N.Y.S.2d 928, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3997 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75, the petitioner Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Winick, J.), entered December 28, 1995, which, upon a memorandum decision granting the respondent’s motion to confirm an arbitration award and denying its cross motion to vacate the award, inter alia, is in favor of the respondent and against it in the principal sum of $9,000.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion to confirm the award is denied, the cross motion to vacate is granted, and the award is vacated.

The insurance policy at issue contained a single combined limit of uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage of $10,000. The petitioner Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company was entitled to an offset for the $10,000 that the respondent recovered from the tortfeasor (see, 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 policy limit was exhausted, the award must be vacated (see, Matter of Deckaj v State Farm Mut. Ins. Co., 230 AD2d 735; Matter of Lotito v Metropolitan Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., supra; see also, Matter of Zurich Ins. Co. v Wilburn, 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, the petitioner Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Winick, J.), entered December 28, 1995, which, upon a memorandum decision granting the respondent’s motion to confirm an arbitration award and denying its cross motion to vacate the award, inter alia, is in favor of the respondent and against it in the principal sum of $9,000.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion to confirm the award is denied, the cross motion to vacate is granted, and the award is vacated.

The insurance policy at issue contained a single combined limit of uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage of $10,000. The petitioner Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company was entitled to an offset for the $10,000 that the respondent recovered from the tortfeasor (see, 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 policy limit was exhausted, the award must be vacated (see, Matter of Deckaj v State Farm Mut. Ins. Co., 230 AD2d 735; Matter of Lotito v Metropolitan Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., supra; see also, Matter of Zurich Ins. Co. v Wilburn, supra). Miller, J. P., Thompson, Joy and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

238 A.D.2d 511, 657 N.Y.S.2d 928, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3997, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nationwide-mutual-insurance-v-damaskinos-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack