From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of St. Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. v. Fenelon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 7, 1994
202 A.D.2d 436 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

March 7, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kassoff, J.).


Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs to State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company.

As the party seeking to stay arbitration in these proceedings, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company (hereinafter State Farm) bore the initial burden of proving at the framed issue hearing that the alleged offending vehicle was insured (see, Matter of Aetna Cas. Sur. Co. v. McMichael, 176 A.D.2d 315; Matter of Nationwide Ins. Co. [Dye — Metropolitan Prop. Liab. Ins. Co.], 170 A.D.2d 683; Matter of Insurance Co. v. Castillo, 158 A.D.2d 691). Contrary to the appellant's claim, State Farm met its burden by introducing into evidence a copy of the "Registration Plate Record" from the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles, which indicated that the appellant insured the offending vehicle at the time of the accident (see, Matter of Eagle Ins. Co. v. Tichman, 185 A.D.2d 884; Matter of Insurance Co. v. Castillo, supra; Matter of Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Horowitz, 121 A.D.2d 634).

Once State Farm presented a prima facie case, the burden shifted to the appellant insurance company, as the party seeking to disclaim coverage, to prove that it did not insure the offending vehicle at the time of the accident (see, Matter of Insurance Co. v. Castillo, supra). Upon our review of the record, we find that the appellant failed to sustain its burden. In this regard, we note that although the Registration Plate Record contained no indication that an assigned risk rather than a voluntary policy had been issued to the offending vehicle, the appellant's underwriter searched only the company's assigned risk files before concluding that the appellant did not insure the offending vehicle prior to the accident. Under these circumstances, we perceive no reason to disturb the Supreme Court's finding that the appellant insured the offending vehicle on the date of the accident (cf., Matter of Nationwide Ins. Co. [Dye — Metropolitan Prop. Liab. Ins. Co.], supra). Mangano, P.J., Pizzuto, Altman and Krausman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of St. Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. v. Fenelon

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 7, 1994
202 A.D.2d 436 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Matter of St. Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. v. Fenelon

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Mar 7, 1994

Citations

202 A.D.2d 436 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
608 N.Y.S.2d 709

Citing Cases

Matter of Transportation Ins. Co. v. Phillips

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs. The burden of justifying a stay of arbitration is on the…

Matter of Transportation Ins. Co. v. Phillips

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, Michael E. Phillips' cross motion is granted, and…