State Farm Mutual Insurance v. Meneses

91 A.D.2d 615, 456 N.Y.S.2d 407, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19463
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 6, 1982·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

— In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to stay arbitration of a claim under the uninsured motorist provisions of an automobile liability policy, Luis Meneses appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Graci, J.), dated May 26,1982, as directed a hearing “of the issues raised by the petitioner as to whether [appellant] was injured in a hit-and-run accident, etc”. Appeal dismissed, sua sponte, without costs or disbursements. The portion of Special Term’s order which appellant seeks to review directed a judicial hearing to aid in the disposition of petitioner’s application for a stay of arbitration. As such, the order does not affect a substantial right (CPLR 5701, subd [a], par 2, cl [v]), and is, therefore, not appealable as of right (see, e.g., Matter of Royal Globe Ins. Co. v Nanas, 90 AD2d 518; Chaimowitz v Goldschmidt, 87 AD2d 882; Bagdy v Progresso Foods Corp., 86 AD2d 589; Matter of Nassau Ins. Co. [Clemente], 86 AD2d 611). An appeal will lie from the judgment entered subsequent to the hearing. Titone, J. P., O’Connor, Thompson and Bracken, JJ., concur.

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

State Farm Mutual Insurance v. Meneses, 91 A.D.2d 615, 456 N.Y.S.2d 407, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19463 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1982).

91 A.D.2d 615 (State Farm Mutual Insurance v. Meneses) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

American Home Assurance Co. v. Taveras
227 A.D.2d 474 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Budell
91 A.D.2d 614 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)