Utica Mutual Insurance v. Lowry

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Utica Mutual Insurance v. Lowry

208 A.D.2d 636, 618 N.Y.S.2d 232, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9515

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

DecidedOctober 11, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 208 A.D.2d 636 (Utica Mutual Insurance v. Lowry) 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

Utica Mutual Insurance v. Lowry, 208 A.D.2d 636, 618 N.Y.S.2d 232, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9515 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to stay the arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Miller, J.), dated [637]*637February 1, 1993, which granted the petition and permanently stayed the arbitration.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court that the appellant failed to demonstrate that he had diligently sought to determine whether the offending vehicle was insured. Thus, the court correctly stayed the arbitration since the appellant did not comply with the provision in his insurance policy that he give notice of any uninsured motorist claims within 90 days of the accident or as soon as practicable (see, State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v Romero, 109 AD2d 786). Mangano, P. J., Lawrence, Copertino, Krausman and Goldstein, 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 the arbitration of an uninsured motorist claim, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Miller, J.), dated [637]*637February 1, 1993, which granted the petition and permanently stayed the arbitration.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court that the appellant failed to demonstrate that he had diligently sought to determine whether the offending vehicle was insured. Thus, the court correctly stayed the arbitration since the appellant did not comply with the provision in his insurance policy that he give notice of any uninsured motorist claims within 90 days of the accident or as soon as practicable (see, State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v Romero, 109 AD2d 786). Mangano, P. J., Lawrence, Copertino, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

208 A.D.2d 636, 618 N.Y.S.2d 232, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9515, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/utica-mutual-insurance-v-lowry-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack