State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Hollis

228 A.D.2d 685, 646 N.Y.2d 29, 646 N.Y.S.2d 29, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7439
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 24, 1996
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 228 A.D.2d 685 (State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Hollis) 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. Hollis, 228 A.D.2d 685, 646 N.Y.2d 29, 646 N.Y.S.2d 29, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7439 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

The Supreme Court properly granted the petitioner’s application to stay arbitration. Underinsured motorists benefits are available when the bodily injury liability limits of the offending vehicle are less than the bodily injury liability limits of the insured’s policy (see, Insurance Law § 3420 [f] [2]; Maurizzio v Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co., 73 NY2d 951; Matter of Federal Ins. Co. v Reingold, 181 AD2d 769). Here the bodily injury liability limits of $100,000 per person and $300,000 per accident in the appellants’ policy were equal to the bodily injury liability limits of the offending vehicle’s policy. Thus, the underinsured motorist endorsement of the petitioner’s policy is not triggered. O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Wilson v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.
246 A.D.2d 593 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
228 A.D.2d 685, 646 N.Y.2d 29, 646 N.Y.S.2d 29, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7439, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-farm-mutual-automobile-insurance-v-hollis-nyappdiv-1996.