From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of General Accident Insurance Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jan 4, 1990
157 A.D.2d 877 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

January 4, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Albany County (Kahn, J.).


Respondent Jane E. Ramee was injured in a collision between a motor vehicle driven by her husband, respondent George W. Ramee, and a vehicle owned and operated by Katherine Ryle. Respondents settled their claim against Ryle for $10,000, the liability limit of Ryle's auto insurance policy, and gave a general release in exchange. Respondents then asserted a claim against petitioner, their own auto insurance carrier, under their "underinsured motorist" endorsement. Petitioner refused payment of the claim, asserting that respondents were not entitled to recover because they prejudiced petitioner by settling their claim against Ryle without reserving petitioner's subrogation rights (see, Weinberg v. Transamerica Ins. Co., 62 N.Y.2d 379). Respondents served a demand for arbitration and petitioner in turn brought this application to stay arbitration pursuant to CPLR 7503. Supreme Court denied the application. Petitioner appeals.

We affirm. Initially, we agree with Supreme Court that petitioner's application was untimely (see, CPLR 7503 [c]). Contrary to petitioner's assertion, respondents served a demand for arbitration on June 22, 1988. The fact that respondents made a request, ultimately rejected, that the arbitration be conducted by the American Arbitration Association did not render the demand a nullity. Accordingly, petitioner's application for a stay of arbitration, made on August 15, 1988, was properly denied (see, Matter of Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. [Miller], 95 A.D.2d 961). Moreover, were we to address the merits, the result would be no different. The subject endorsement specifically provides for arbitration of the issue of whether a covered person is entitled to recover damages under it. Therefore, the merit of respondents' claim is to be determined by the arbitrators and not by the courts (see, Matter of Prudential Prop. Cas. Ins. Co. [Hildalgo], 133 A.D.2d 87, 88).

Order affirmed, with costs. Mahoney, P.J., Weiss, Mikoll, Levine and Mercure, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of General Accident Insurance Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jan 4, 1990
157 A.D.2d 877 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Matter of General Accident Insurance Company

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Arbitration between GENERAL ACCIDENT INSURANCE…

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

Date published: Jan 4, 1990

Citations

157 A.D.2d 877 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
549 N.Y.S.2d 880

Citing Cases

Matter of U.S. Fidelity Guar. v. Mitchell

Such language submits to arbitration the issues of fault and damages, but it does not include the issue of…

Matter of Allstate Insurance Co. v. Streem

The arbitration clause contained in the instant underinsurance policy includes the following general…