Sinicropi v. State Farm Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 31 January 1977 |
| Citation | 391 N.Y.S.2d 444,55 A.D.2d 957 |
| Parties | In the Matter of Anthony SINICROPI, Respondent, v. STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Curtis, Hart & Zaklukiewicz, Merrick (Edward J. Hart, Merrick, of counsel), for appellant.
Berman & Vladimir, P.C., Garden City (Arthur C. Berman, Garden City, of counsel), for respondent.
Before COHALAN, Acting P.J., and MARGETT, SUOZZI and MOLLEN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a proceeding to stay arbitration of petitioner's claim under the uninsured motorist provisions of his policy, the State Farm Insurance Company appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated July 20, 1976, which denied the application.
Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements.
The appellant claimed that it was entitled to set off against any uninsured motorist award, the no-fault benefits which it had paid and, since it had paid more than the limit of its liability under the uninsured motorist coverage, there was no need for arbitration. The appellant is not entitled to set off those benefits. The no-fault benefits are for basic economic loss and the uninsured motorist coverage is for pain and suffering and other expenses incurred which are not compensable by no-fault benefits. Neither the Insurance Law nor the insurance policy allows the insurer to set off those benefits. To the extent that the Insurance Department's regulations are inconsistent (see 11 NYCRR 65.6 (Q)), they are not valid (see Matter of Adams (Government Employees Ins. Co.), 52 A.D.2d 118, 383 N.Y.S.2d 319).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fox v. Atlantic Mut. Ins. Co.
...of the no-fault scheme (see also, Matter of Nasca v. Royal Globe Ins. Co, 84 A.D.2d 675, 446 N.Y.S.2d 623; Matter of Sinicropi v. State Farm Ins. Co., 55 A.D.2d 957, 391 N.Y.S.2d 444; Matter of Empire Mutual Ins. Co. [Konetsky], 92 Misc.2d 843, 402 N.Y.S.2d 705, affd. 55 A.D.2d 893, 391 N.Y......
-
Rich v. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., Inc., 66319
...protection. See American Service Mutual Insurance Co. v. Wilson, 323 So.2d 645 (Fla.Dist.App.1975); and Sinicropi v. State Farm Insurance Co., 55 A.D.2d 957, 391 N.Y.S.2d 444 (1977). Uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage was developed by the Kansas Legislature as a means of protectin......
-
State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co. v. Coppersmith
...pain and suffering each is a separate claim, and the insurer may not set off one against the other. Sinicropi v. State Farm Insurance Company, 55 A.D.2d 957, 391 N.Y.S.2d 444 (2d Dept.1977). As to State Farm's rights under the contract of insurance, the Court takes notice of a recent case w......