New York Central Mutual v. Coriolan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

New York Central Mutual v. Coriolan

5 A.D.3d 493, 772 N.Y.S.2d 827, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2457

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

DecidedMarch 8, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 5 A.D.3d 493 (New York Central Mutual v. Coriolan) 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

New York Central Mutual v. Coriolan, 5 A.D.3d 493, 772 N.Y.S.2d 827, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2457 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

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, Queens County (Thomas, J.), dated November 25, 2002, which, after a hearing, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The petitioner’s insured served a demand for arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim. The petitioner subsequently commenced this proceeding to stay arbitration and made a prima facie showing that the offending vehicle was insured by Pacific Employer’s Insurance Company (hereinafter Pacific). However, the prima facie showing of coverage was rebutted by the testimony of Pacific’s claims representative, as corroborated by documentary evidence, that several searches of the company’s records were conducted and no policy could be located. Since the petitioner did not present further evidence of coverage to overcome the rebuttal of its prima facie case, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding (see Matter of American Tr. Ins. Co., 208 AD2d 376, 377 [1994]; Mat[494]*494ter of Allstate Ins. Co. v Karadag, 205 AD2d 531, 532 [1994]). Altman, J.P., Smith, H. Miller and Mastro, 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, Queens County (Thomas, J.), dated November 25, 2002, which, after a hearing, denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The petitioner’s insured served a demand for arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim. The petitioner subsequently commenced this proceeding to stay arbitration and made a prima facie showing that the offending vehicle was insured by Pacific Employer’s Insurance Company (hereinafter Pacific). However, the prima facie showing of coverage was rebutted by the testimony of Pacific’s claims representative, as corroborated by documentary evidence, that several searches of the company’s records were conducted and no policy could be located. Since the petitioner did not present further evidence of coverage to overcome the rebuttal of its prima facie case, the Supreme Court properly denied the petition and dismissed the proceeding (see Matter of American Tr. Ins. Co., 208 AD2d 376, 377 [1994]; Mat[494]*494ter of Allstate Ins. Co. v Karadag, 205 AD2d 531, 532 [1994]). Altman, J.P., Smith, H. Miller and Mastro, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

5 A.D.3d 493, 772 N.Y.S.2d 827, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2457, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/new-york-central-mutual-v-coriolan-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack