From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

MATTER OF PERL v. GENERAL FIRE CAS. CO

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jul 9, 1970
35 A.D.2d 655 (N.Y. App. Div. 1970)

Summary

In Perl v. General Fire Cas. Co., 34 App. Div.2d 748, 310 N.Y.S.2d 196 (1970), the court determined that an attorney arbitrator whose practice consisted of representation of insurance companies, though in what particular aspect does not appear, and who also had an interest in a company which provided investigatory services for insurance companies was not required by the AAA rules to disclose such activities when appointed to arbitrate pursuant to a clause in an insurance policy.

Summary of this case from St. Paul Ins. Companies v. Lusis

Opinion

Decided July 9, 1970


MOTION FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL TO COURT OF APPEALS GRANTED


Summaries of

MATTER OF PERL v. GENERAL FIRE CAS. CO

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jul 9, 1970
35 A.D.2d 655 (N.Y. App. Div. 1970)

In Perl v. General Fire Cas. Co., 34 App. Div.2d 748, 310 N.Y.S.2d 196 (1970), the court determined that an attorney arbitrator whose practice consisted of representation of insurance companies, though in what particular aspect does not appear, and who also had an interest in a company which provided investigatory services for insurance companies was not required by the AAA rules to disclose such activities when appointed to arbitrate pursuant to a clause in an insurance policy.

Summary of this case from St. Paul Ins. Companies v. Lusis
Case details for

MATTER OF PERL v. GENERAL FIRE CAS. CO

Case Details

Full title:PERL (J.), MATTER OF, v. GENERAL FIRE CAS. CO

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

Date published: Jul 9, 1970

Citations

35 A.D.2d 655 (N.Y. App. Div. 1970)

Citing Cases

St. Paul Ins. Companies v. Lusis

Not every relationship is a disclosable relationship. In Perl v. General Fire Cas. Co., 34 App. Div.2d 748,…