From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pilkenton v. N.Y. Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Dec 27, 2013
112 A.D.3d 1327 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)

Opinion

2013-12-27

Jason T. PILKENTON, Petitioner–Respondent, v. NEW YORK CENTRAL MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent–Appellant.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Livingston County (Dennis S. Cohen, A.J.), entered April 3, 2013. The order granted the petition seeking, inter alia, to direct respondent to submit to the appraisal process set forth in its policy of insurance. Rupp, Baase, Pfalzgraf, Cunningham & Coppola LLC, Buffalo (Marco Cercone of Counsel), for Respondent–Appellant. Jason T. Pilkenton, Petitioner–Respondent Pro Se.


Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Livingston County (Dennis S. Cohen, A.J.), entered April 3, 2013. The order granted the petition seeking, inter alia, to direct respondent to submit to the appraisal process set forth in its policy of insurance.
Rupp, Baase, Pfalzgraf, Cunningham & Coppola LLC, Buffalo (Marco Cercone of Counsel), for Respondent–Appellant. Jason T. Pilkenton, Petitioner–Respondent Pro Se.
MEMORANDUM:

Respondent appeals from an order that granted the petition seeking, inter alia, to direct respondent to submit to the appraisal process set forth in its policy of insurance. Assuming without deciding that the petition was timely filed and procedurally proper, we agree with respondent that the insurance coverage dispute precludes the application of the appraisal process set forth in the policy ( see Kawa v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 174 Misc.2d 407, 408–409, 664 N.Y.S.2d 430; see generally Amerex Group, Inc. v. Lexington Ins. Co., 678 F.3d 193, 204 [2d Cir.] ). Insurance Law § 3408(c) provides for an appraisal in the event of a covered loss, and here there is a pending declaratory judgment action in which the parties dispute whether this is a covered loss.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously reversed on the law without costs and the petition is denied. SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, LINDLEY, SCONIERS, and VALENTINO, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Pilkenton v. N.Y. Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.
Dec 27, 2013
112 A.D.3d 1327 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
Case details for

Pilkenton v. N.Y. Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:Jason T. PILKENTON, Petitioner–Respondent, v. NEW YORK CENTRAL MUTUAL FIRE…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department, New York.

Date published: Dec 27, 2013

Citations

112 A.D.3d 1327 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 8709
976 N.Y.S.2d 911

Citing Cases

Pottenburgh v. Dryden Mut. Ins. Co.

This conclusion is supported by the persuasive and extensive analysis set forth in Lee v California Capital…

Pottenburgh v. Dryden Mut. Ins. Co.

This conclusion is supported by the persuasive and extensive analysis set forth in Lee v. California Capital…