Providence Washington Insurance v. Villanueva

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Providence Washington Insurance v. Villanueva

281 A.D.2d 424, 721 N.Y.S.2d 264, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2129

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

DecidedMarch 5, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 281 A.D.2d 424 (Providence Washington Insurance v. Villanueva) 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

Providence Washington Insurance v. Villanueva, 281 A.D.2d 424, 721 N.Y.S.2d 264, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2129 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to temporarily stay arbitration of a claim for underinsured motorist benefits, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Knipel, J.), dated July 7, 2000, which denied its motion to renew a prior petition to temporarily stay arbitration pending further discovery.

Ordered that the order is reversed, with costs, the petitioner’s [425]*425motion for renewal is granted, and upon renewal, the petition is granted.

Under the circumstances presented, the petitioner is entitled to a temporary stay of arbitration of the respondent’s claim for underinsured motorist’s benefits pending further discovery (see, Matter of Metropolitan Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v Keeney, 241 AD2d 455). Ritter, J. P., Krausman, Florio and Feuerstein, 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 temporarily stay arbitration of a claim for underinsured motorist benefits, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Knipel, J.), dated July 7, 2000, which denied its motion to renew a prior petition to temporarily stay arbitration pending further discovery.

Ordered that the order is reversed, with costs, the petitioner’s [425]*425motion for renewal is granted, and upon renewal, the petition is granted.

Under the circumstances presented, the petitioner is entitled to a temporary stay of arbitration of the respondent’s claim for underinsured motorist’s benefits pending further discovery (see, Matter of Metropolitan Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v Keeney, 241 AD2d 455). Ritter, J. P., Krausman, Florio and Feuerstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

281 A.D.2d 424, 721 N.Y.S.2d 264, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2129, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/providence-washington-insurance-v-villanueva-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack