Legal Opinion
In Re the Arbitration Between Furstenberg & Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided February 7, 1980PublishedCited by 55 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, with costs, and the judgment of Supreme Court confirming the arbitration award reinstated.
Recognizing that Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. was obliged under the statute to accept the arbitral forum for the resolution of the claim against it, we agree that the standard for judicial review of the award is more exacting than in voluntary arbitration (cf. Mount St. Mary’s Hosp. of Niagara Falls v Catherwood, 26 NY2d 493). We conclude, however, that it was error on the part of the Appellate Division to set this…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Mount St. Mary's Hospital v. CatherwoodNew York Court of Appeals · 1970
3Cited by55 opinions
- Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corp. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1996
- In Re the Arbitration Between Smith & Firemen's InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- In re the Arbitration between Shand & Aetna InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1980
- MOTOR VEHICLE MFRS. v. StateNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
- Robert J. Lyeth v. Chrysler Corporation, Robert Abrams, Attorney General of the State of New York, InterveningCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1991
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.