Legal Opinion
Factory Mutual Insurance v. Mutual Marine Office, Inc.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 11, 2008PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
The court properly interpreted the arbitration clause with respect to the arbitrability of matters “not specifically covered” in the underlying agreement; the contrary interpretation proffered by the insurers would render the word “specifically” meaningless (see Beal Sav. Bank v Sommer, 8 NY3d 318, 324 [2007]). Mutual Marine’s interpretation was not precluded by its unsuccessful argument in another case (see Baje Realty Corp. v Cutler, 32 AD3d 307, 310 [2006]). Arbitration was not barred by the inclusion of a reformation claim (see Matter of SCM Corp. [Fisher Park Lane Co.], 40 NY2d 788,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Beal Savings Bank v. SommerNew York Court of Appeals · 2007
- In re the Arbitration between SCM Corp. & Fisher Park Lane Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1976
- Diamond Waterproofing Systems, Inc. v. 55 Liberty Owners Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 2005
- Baje Realty Corp. v. CutlerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
3Cited by1 opinion
- TMB Communications v. PreeferAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009