Legal Opinion

In re the Arbitration between Aetna Casualty & Surety Insurance & Schulman

New York Supreme Court

Decided August 3, 1988PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Beatrice S. Burstein, J.

Petitioner insurer seeks a permanent stay of the arbitration demanded by respondent, its insured. The application is denied and the parties are directed to proceed to arbitration in the forum called for in respondent’s policy.

*678Petitioner admits it insured respondent on the date of the underlying motor vehicle accident, which respondent has demonstrated was settled for $10,000, the full value of the policy of insurance covering the offending vehicle. Respondent claims he sustained injuries for which further compensation is warranted. At the heart of…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Sincoff v. Liberty Mutual Fire InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1962
  2. De Forte v. Allstate InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1981
  3. In re the Arbitration between Knickerbocker Insurance & GilbertNew York Court of Appeals · 1971
  4. Facet Industries, Inc. v. WrightNew York Court of Appeals · 1984

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Casualty & Surety Co. v. SchulmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API