Legal Opinion
In re the Arbitration between Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp. & Oppedisano
New York Supreme Court
Decided June 10, 1963PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the CourtDaniel G. Albert, J.
This motion to stay a demand for arbitration is predicated on the theory that the respondent failed to demonstrate that the personal injuries sustained by him resulted from actual physical contact with a “ hit-and-run ” car.
On February 3, 1963, the respondent was driving his vehicle on Glen Cove Road in Nassau County, New York, when his car skidded on the icy pavement and plowed head long into a snow bank at the edge of the road. The car remained in that position for about five minutes as the respondent attempted to remove the snow from about the right front wheel. While the respondent was so…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Lokos v. New Amsterdam Casualty Co.City of New York Municipal Court · 1949
- Katz v. Ocean Accident & Guarantee Corp.City of New York Municipal Court · 1952
- Bellavia v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1961
- Portman v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1962
- Flores v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnificatifn Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1962
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Inter-Insurance Exchange of Automobile Club v. LopezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965