Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co. v. Travelers Ins. Co.

Decision Date17 December 1964
Docket NumberNo. 26819,26819
Citation206 A.2d 847,25 Conn.Supp. 414
CourtConnecticut Superior Court

Upson & Secor, Waterbury, for plaintiff.

William B. Fitzgerald, Waterbury, for named defendant.

Morton S. Kramer, Waterbury, for defendant Joseph Poray-Wybranowski.

COTTER, Judge.

The plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment determining whether or not the plaintiff is under a duty or obligation, by virtue of an insurance policy issued by it to the defendant Joseph Poray-Wybranowski, to arbitrate a claim of that defendant.

The Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company issued a family automobile policy to Poray-Wybranowski which included protection against uninsured motorists. This policy contained an arbitration clause as follows: '6. Arbitration. If any person making claim hereunder and the company do not agree that such person is legally entitled to recover damages from the owner or operator of an uninsured automobile because of bodily injury to the insured, or do not agree as to the amount of payment which may be owing under this Section, then, upon written demand of either, the matter or matters upon which such person and the company do not agree shall be settled by arbitration in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association, and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrators may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. Such person and the company each agree to consider itself bound and to be bound by any award made by the arbitrators pursuant to this Section.'

Poray-Wybranowski was in an accident with a car owned by Henry Jackson and driven at various times by John Jacintho and Cornelius J. Johnson. He has sued Jackson, Jacintho and Johnson in a separate suit for damages and injuries. It is claimed that Jackson gave permission to Jacintho and Johnson to operate his car. The Travelers Insurance Company issued a standard automobile liability insurance policy covering the operation of the Jackson vehicle but denies coverage as to Jacintho and has refused to enter an appearance for him in that action. Poray-Wybranowski has asked the plaintiff in the present action to arbitrate his claim under the uninsured motorist provision of his policy, and the company has refused to do so.

Arbitration is in derogation of the common law, and parties are only required to arbitrate those issues which they specifically have agreed to arbitrate. A party may be compelled to arbitrate a dispute only if he has expressly agreed to use this type of forum for the determination of his legal rights and duties, and in the absence of a specific agreement to arbitrate he cannot be compelled to do so, but rather has the right to have his rights and obligations determined in a court of law.

Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company agreed with Poray-Wybranowski to arbitration of only two disputes, namely: (1) whether or not Poray-Wybranowski is legally entitled to recover damages from the owner or operator of the uninsured automobile; (2) the amount of payment which may be owing under the uninsured endorsement coverage. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company does not concede that at the time of the accident Jacintho was not covered by the liability policy issued by The Travelers Insurance Company so that the motor vehicle was an uninsured motor vehicle...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Bennett v. Meader
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • July 19, 1988
    ...disputes from the courts, where the claimant has a right to disposition, to a private forum. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Travelers Ins. Co., 25 Conn Sup. 414, 416, 206 A.2d 847 (1964). Common law rules of arbitration must yield to statutory provisions concerning the subject matter ......
  • Travelers Indem. Co. v. Mongiovi
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division
    • June 3, 1975
    ...vehicle) and damages (recoverable by Mongiovi). Visselli v. American Fedelity Co., supra; Hertford Accident & Indemn. Co. v. Travelers Ins. Co., 25 Conn.Sup. 414, 206 A.2d 847 (Super.Ct.1964). Leatherby's right to disclaim is not an issue for arbitration between Mongiovi and Travelers, but ......
  • Frager v. Pennsylvania General Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • June 26, 1967
    ...damages from the owner or operator of an uninsured automobile, and (2) the amount of such damages. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Travelers Ins. Co., 25 Conn.Sup. 414, 417, 206 A.2d 847; Matter of Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation (Downey), 11 N.Y.2d 995, 229 N.Y.S.2d......
  • Maryland Cas. Co. v. McGee, Docket No. 8656
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan — District of US
    • April 21, 1971
    ... ... adopted by the Superior Court of Connecticut in Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Travelers Insurance Co ... 321, 136 N.W.2d 51 ... 2 In Lord v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co. (1970), 22 Mich.App. 669, 177 N.W.2d 653, it was the ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT