From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co. v. Provus

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 10, 1989
149 A.D.2d 498 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Opinion

April 10, 1989

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


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Based on the medical reports furnished to it prior to the uninsured motorist arbitration held in this case, the petitioner had every reason to believe that the claimant's injuries amounted to nothing more than "post-concussive syndrome" which "would recede in time". However, at the arbitration hearing, the claimant produced an expert witness who testified that the claimant in fact suffered from a permanent form of epilepsy. This witness testified with reference to a medical report which had never been furnished to the petitioner and which contained a diagnosis of "post-traumatic seizure disorder [which] is permanent and is not likely to improve". The monetary award made by the arbitrators indicates that they accepted this doctor's assessment of the claimant's condition.

We agree with the Supreme Court that the arbitrators abused their discretion when they refused to grant the petitioner's request for an adjournment of the arbitration hearing in order to allow it to exercise its right to conduct a physical examination of the claimant. The petitioner had been misled into believing that the claimant's injuries were so minor as to render a physical examination unnecessary. It had relied, to its detriment, upon misleading medical reports and was consequently unprepared to rebut the expert medical evidence produced by the claimant at the arbitration hearing. The arbitration hearing, as it was conducted, was completely one sided, and fundamentally unfair. Under these particular circumstances, the refusal of the arbitrators to grant the petitioner's application for an adjournment constitutes misconduct which warrants vacatur of the award (CPLR 7511 [b] [1] [i]; see, generally, Matter of Leblon Consultants [Jackson], 92 A.D.2d 499; International Components Corp. v. Klaiber, 59 A.D.2d 853; Matter of Woodco Mfg. Corp. [G.R. R. Mfg.], 51 A.D.2d 631). Mollen, P.J., Mangano, Brown and Harwood, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co. v. Provus

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 10, 1989
149 A.D.2d 498 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
Case details for

State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co. v. Provus

Case Details

Full title:STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent, v. BARBARA…

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

Date published: Apr 10, 1989

Citations

149 A.D.2d 498 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Citing Cases

Vitaliti v. The N.Y.C. Transit Auth.

It also allows for vacatur of a hearing arbitration decision if the master arbitrator finds the underlying…

Matter of Omega Contr. v. Maropakis Contr

It is well established that the decision as to whether to grant or to refuse an adjournment is within the…