In re the Arbitration between Passik & Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp.
New York Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtThomas A. Aurelio, J.
Respondent moves for an order staying arbitration. It argues that it cannot be compelled to arbitrate since the petitioner asserted the existence of insurance. It is clear from the documentary proof that petitioner has stated the existence of a policy of insurance, but that there was in fact no insurance coverage by reason of disclaimer of liability and coverage. The action arose while the infant was a passenger in a ear owned and operated by his father. Institution of the arbitration proceeding on behalf of the infant by his mother as his guardian ad litem has been authorized by an order of…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Matter of Hesslein Co. v. GreenfieldNew York Court of Appeals · 1939
- Schafran & Finkel, Inc. v. M. Lowenstein & Sons, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1939
- Schafran & Finkel, Inc. v. M. Lowenstein & Sons, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1938
3Cited by1 opinion
- G. H. & J. T. Kelly, Inc. v. Lorson Electric Co.New York Supreme Court · 1966