Qian Bai Yun v. M.V.A.I.C.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Qian Bai Yun v. M.V.A.I.C.

300 A.D.2d 664, 751 N.Y.S.2d 788

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

DecidedDecember 30, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 300 A.D.2d 664 (Qian Bai Yun v. M.V.A.I.C.) 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

Qian Bai Yun v. M.V.A.I.C., 300 A.D.2d 664, 751 N.Y.S.2d 788 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to Insurance Law § 5218 for leave to bring an action against the Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Weiss, J.), dated December 4, 2001, which granted the petition.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court that there was sufficient evidence to establish that the petitioners made reasonable efforts to ascertain the identity of the motor vehicles and the owners and operators involved in this hit-and-run motor vehicle accident (see Insurance Law § 5218 [a], [b] [5]; Matter of Vargas v Motor Veh. Ace. Indem. Corp., 29 AD2d 521). Ritter, J.P., Friedmann, Luciano and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

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

—In a proceeding pursuant to Insurance Law § 5218 for leave to bring an action against the Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Weiss, J.), dated December 4, 2001, which granted the petition.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court that there was sufficient evidence to establish that the petitioners made reasonable efforts to ascertain the identity of the motor vehicles and the owners and operators involved in this hit-and-run motor vehicle accident (see Insurance Law § 5218 [a], [b] [5]; Matter of Vargas v Motor Veh. Ace. Indem. Corp., 29 AD2d 521). Ritter, J.P., Friedmann, Luciano and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

300 A.D.2d 664, 751 N.Y.S.2d 788, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/qian-bai-yun-v-mvaic-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack