In re the Arbitration between Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp. & Kilgallon
New York Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtHerbert D. Hamm, J.
The respondent is an insured person. Notice of intention has been served and demand for arbitration has been made.
The respondent alleges that he was injured by the operator of a stolen automobile. The petitioner’s attorneys have advised that they are ‘ ‘ satisfied from the Reply Affidavit and from subsequent investigation that the vehicle involved was stolen.”
It is not disputed that the automobile was insured. As a matter of fact the respondent has submitted a statement from the Massachusetts Registry of Motor Vehicles furnishing the name of the owner’s insurance company and the petitioner…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Morgan v. Greater New York Taxpayers Mutual InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1953
- In re the Arbitration between Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp. & MarshallNew York Supreme Court · 1963
- Cruzado v. UnderwoodNew York Supreme Court · 1963
- In re the Arbitration between Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp. & CurtisNew York Supreme Court · 1962