Matter of Travelers Indem. Co. (Armstead)

Annotate this Case
Matter of Matter of Travelers Indem. Co. (Armstead) 2011 NY Slip Op 08826 Decided on December 8, 2011 Appellate Division, First Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on December 8, 2011
Tom, J.P., Moskowitz, Richter, Abdus-Salaam, Román, JJ.
6260N 260398/10 6260NA

[*1]In re The Travelers Indemnity Company, etc., Petitioner-Respondent,

and

Katrina Armstead, et al., Respondents, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Additional Respondent-Appellant, Farouk Omar, Additional-Respondent.




Martin , Fallon & Mullé, Huntington (Richard C. Mullé of
counsel), for appellant.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Geoffrey D. Wright, J.), entered September 15, 2010, which granted petitioner's motion for a permanent stay of uninsured motorist arbitration, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion denied, petitioner directed to join State Farm as an additional respondent and serve it with a supplemental petition and notice of petition, and the matter remanded for a hearing on the issue of State Farm's cancellation of its policy, and stayed pending the hearing. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered January 18, 2011, which granted State Farm's motion to reargue and, upon reargument, adhered to the initial determination, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as academic.

Petitioner concedes that the court lacked jurisdiction over State Farm (see Matter of American Tr. Ins. Co. [Carillo], 307 AD2d 220 [2003]; Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. v Perez, 157 AD2d 521 [1990]). Accordingly, the court improperly considered the merits of the petition.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: DECEMBER 8, 2011

CLERK

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.