Tokio Marine & Fire Insurance v. Sosis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Tokio Marine & Fire Insurance v. Sosis

126 A.D.2d 475, 511 N.Y.S.2d 9, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 41619

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

DecidedJanuary 22, 1987

StatusPublished

This text of 126 A.D.2d 475 (Tokio Marine & Fire Insurance v. Sosis) 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

Tokio Marine & Fire Insurance v. Sosis, 126 A.D.2d 475, 511 N.Y.S.2d 9, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 41619 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

Order of the Supreme Court, New York (Leonard N. Cohen, J.), entered on January 16, 1986, which denied the motion to vacate a stipulation concerning insurance coverage, is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Although Special Term properly denied the motion to vacate the stipulation in question, it should be noted that the court was not warranted in finding that respondent United Services Automobile Association has waived on behalf of its insured, defendant Theresa Arcarola, and that the insured has waived on her own behalf, any claim or defense that her vehicle was not involved in the accident which is the subject of this proceeding. Nothing contained in the stipulation can be construed as meaning that there is no dispute concerning whether the automobile belonging to Arcarola came into contact with the automobile owned by respondent Lydia Stone and operated by respondent Allen Sosis. Rather, the stipulation deals exclusively with the issue of insurance coverage and not with liability for the accident. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Lynch, Milonas and Rosenberger, JJ.

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

Order of the Supreme Court, New York (Leonard N. Cohen, J.), entered on January 16, 1986, which denied the motion to vacate a stipulation concerning insurance coverage, is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

Although Special Term properly denied the motion to vacate the stipulation in question, it should be noted that the court was not warranted in finding that respondent United Services Automobile Association has waived on behalf of its insured, defendant Theresa Arcarola, and that the insured has waived on her own behalf, any claim or defense that her vehicle was not involved in the accident which is the subject of this proceeding. Nothing contained in the stipulation can be construed as meaning that there is no dispute concerning whether the automobile belonging to Arcarola came into contact with the automobile owned by respondent Lydia Stone and operated by respondent Allen Sosis. Rather, the stipulation deals exclusively with the issue of insurance coverage and not with liability for the accident. Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Lynch, Milonas and Rosenberger, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

126 A.D.2d 475, 511 N.Y.S.2d 9, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 41619, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tokio-marine-fire-insurance-v-sosis-nyappdiv-1987.