U.S. Fire Ins. Co. v. Fotinakos
| Decision Date | 04 April 1994 |
| Citation | 609 N.Y.S.2d 672,203 A.D.2d 296 |
| Parties | In the Matter of UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, etc., Appellant, v. George FOTINAKOS, Respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Kelly & McGlynn, New York City (Martin M. McGlynn, of counsel), for appellant.
Devries & Sobiloff, New York City (David L. Sobiloff, of counsel), for respondent.
Before BALLETTA, J.P., and RITTER, COPERTINO and GOLDSTEIN, JJ.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
In a proceeding to stay arbitration of an underinsured supplemental uninsurance motorists' claim, the appeal is from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Huttner, J.), dated July 24, 1991, which denied the application and directed the parties to proceed to arbitration.
ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the petition is granted, and arbitration of the respondent's claim for underinsured motorists' benefits is permanently stayed.
Pursuant to the express terms of the subject insurance policy, the petitioner is entitled to reduce the amount payable under the supplemental uninsured motorists' coverage by all sums paid to the respondent for Workers' Compensation (see, Matter of Valente v. Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 77 N.Y.2d 894, 568 N.Y.S.2d 901, 571 N.E.2d 71). Here, the petitioner contends that the respondent has received Workers' Compensation benefits exceeding the policy limits for supplemental uninsured motorists' coverage, a claim that he does not controvert. Under the circumstances, the petition to stay arbitration of the respondent's claim for additional underinsured motorists' benefits should have been granted (see, Matter of General Acc. Ins. Co. of Am. v. Bailey, 178 A.D.2d 924, 925, 578 N.Y.S.2d 346). We note that the respondent's reliance on Regulation 35-D (see, 11 NYCRR 60-2.0, et seq.) is misplaced. The regulation in question, applicable to policies issued or renewed on or after October 1, 1993, has no bearing on the subject policy which was issued on November 1, 1989, and which was in effect until November 1, 1990.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Utica Mut. Ins. Co. (Hurd), Matter of
... ... & Liab. Ins. Co. v. Cassidy, 127 Misc.2d 641, 486 N.Y.S.2d 843; Gull v. General Acc. Fire & Life Assur. Corp., 121 Misc.2d 721, 469 N.Y.S.2d 1004). It is because of that confusion that ... Co. v. Fotinakos, 203 A.D.2d ... 296, 609 N.Y.S.2d 672). Although Hurd purchased underinsurance coverage, he did ... ...
-
Exchange Ins. Co. (Skomski), Matter of
...Matter of Valente v. Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 77 N.Y.2d 894, 568 N.Y.S.2d 901, 571 N.E.2d 71; Matter of United States Fire Ins. Co. v. Fotinakos, 203 A.D.2d 296, 609 N.Y.S.2d 672; Matter of General Acc. Ins. Co. of Am. v. Bailey, 178 A.D.2d 924, 925, 578 N.Y.S.2d Although paragraph......
-
Nationwide Ins. Co. v. Dean
...Dean (Matter of Lyons v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, 208 A.D.2d 540, 617 N.Y.S.2d 37; Matter of United States Fire Ins. Co. v. Fotinakos, 203 A.D.2d 296, 609 N.Y.S.2d 672; see, Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. [Stolarz--N.J. Mfrs. Ins. Co.], 81 N.Y.2d 219, 597 N.Y.S.2d 904, 613 N......
- People v. Allaway