Legal Opinion

In re the Arbitration between Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority & Evans

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 24, 1983PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Irving Kramer, J.

Upon the foregoing papers, the application of the petitioner, Manhattan and Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority (Transit Authority), for an order staying the arbitration of an uninsured motorists claim commenced by the respondent is denied.

It is undisputed that the Transit Authority, in compliance with subdivision 1 of section 370 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law and subdivision 2-a of section 167 of the Insurance Law is required to provide uninsured motorists coverage (Matter of New York City Tr. Auth. [Thom], 70 AD2d 158, affd 52 NY2d 1032). The…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. In Re the Arbitration Between New York City Transit Authority & ThomNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
  2. In re the Arbitration between New York City Transit AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority v. EvansAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
  2. MATTER OF AETNA CAS. & SUR. CO. v. CochraneNew York Court of Appeals · 1985
  3. Reichel v. Government Employees InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
  4. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. CochraneNew York Court of Appeals · 1985

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API