Technology Insurance v. Countrywide Insurance

135 A.D.3d 455, 21 N.Y.S.3d 895

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Geoffrey D. Wright, J.), entered on or about August 27, 2014, which granted petitioner’s motion to confirm an arbitration award, and denied respondent’s cross motion to dismiss the petition, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The arbitration award is supported by the “reasonable hypothesis,” drawn from petitioner’s unrefuted evidence and the reasonable inferences arising therefrom, that the vehicle insured by petitioner was used principally for the transportation of persons for hire, and therefore satisfied the threshold requirements of Insurance Law § 5105 (a) (see Matter of Motor Veh. Acc. Indem. Corp. v Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 89 NY2d 214, 224 [1996]; Matter of Tri State Consumer Ins. Co. v High Point Prop. & Cas. Co., 127 AD3d 980 [2d Dept 2015]).

Respondent’s contention that the award was procured by arbitrator misconduct, i.e., the failure to hold petitioner to its threshold burden of showing that the minimum requirements of Insurance Law § 5105 (a) were met, is undermined by the record. Concur — Tom, J.R, Mazzarelli, Richter and Gische, JJ.