State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Castro

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Castro

266 A.D.2d 464, 698 N.Y.S.2d 535, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12031

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

DecidedNovember 22, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 266 A.D.2d 464 (State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Castro) 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

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Castro, 266 A.D.2d 464, 698 N.Y.S.2d 535, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12031 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to stay arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Lockman, J.), dated October 16, 1998, which denied the petition without a hearing.

Ordered that the order is reversed, with costs, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Nassau County, for further proceedings consistent herewith.

A triable issue of fact was raised as to whether the vehicle [465]*465owned and operated by Anna Bou was insured by the Colonial Penn Insurance Company at the time of the accident. Accordingly, that issue should be resolved at a hearing (see, American Tr. Ins. Co. v Story, 260 AD2d 240; Matter of State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v Fenelon, 202 AD2d 436; Matter of Eagle Ins. Co. v Tichman, 185 AD2d 884; Matter of Empire Mut. Ins. Co. [Greaney], 156 AD2d 154). Ritter, J. P., Joy, Goldstein and Mc-Ginity, 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 an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Lockman, J.), dated October 16, 1998, which denied the petition without a hearing.

Ordered that the order is reversed, with costs, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Nassau County, for further proceedings consistent herewith.

A triable issue of fact was raised as to whether the vehicle [465]*465owned and operated by Anna Bou was insured by the Colonial Penn Insurance Company at the time of the accident. Accordingly, that issue should be resolved at a hearing (see, American Tr. Ins. Co. v Story, 260 AD2d 240; Matter of State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v Fenelon, 202 AD2d 436; Matter of Eagle Ins. Co. v Tichman, 185 AD2d 884; Matter of Empire Mut. Ins. Co. [Greaney], 156 AD2d 154). Ritter, J. P., Joy, Goldstein and Mc-Ginity, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

266 A.D.2d 464, 698 N.Y.S.2d 535, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12031, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-farm-mutual-automobile-insurance-v-castro-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack