Opinion
2019–06848 Index No. 523568/18
10-21-2020
In the Matter of COUNTRY-WIDE INSURANCE COMPANY, appellant, v. Gillian ADAMS, respondent-respondent; Camille Pierre Joel, et al., proposed additional respondents, GEICO General Insurance Company, proposed additional respondent-respondent; Access Insurance Company, et al., nonparty-respondents.
Jaffe & Velazquez, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Jean H. Kang of counsel), for appellant.
Jaffe & Velazquez, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Jean H. Kang of counsel), for appellant.
MARK C. DILLON, J.P., JOSEPH J. MALTESE, BETSY BARROS, FRANCESCA E. CONNOLLY, JJ.
DECISION & ORDER
In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75, inter alia, to permanently stay arbitration of a claim for uninsured motorist benefits, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Edgar G. Walker, J.), dated April 26, 2019. The order denied the amended petition and, in effect, dismissed the proceeding.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The petitioner commenced this proceeding, inter alia, to permanently stay arbitration of a claim for uninsured motorist benefits made by its insured, the respondent, Gillian Adams. Adams's claim arose from a motor vehicle accident she had with a vehicle driven by the proposed additional respondent Camille Pierre Joel. The petitioner alleged that Joel was insured by the proposed additional respondent GEICO General Insurance Company. The Supreme Court denied the amended petition and, in effect, dismissed the proceeding. The petitioner appeals.
"The party seeking a stay of arbitration has the burden of showing the existence of sufficient evidentiary facts to establish a preliminary issue which would justify the stay" ( Matter of AutoOne Ins. Co. v. Umanzor, 74 A.D.3d 1335, 1336, 903 N.Y.S.2d 253 ; see Matter of Country–Wide Ins. Co. v. Santos, 175 A.D.3d 1530, 109 N.Y.S.3d 446 ; Matter of Farmers Ins./Truck Ins. Exch. v. Terzulli, 112 A.D.3d 628, 975 N.Y.S.2d 915 ; Matter of Hertz Corp. v. Holmes, 106 A.D.3d 1001, 1002–1003, 966 N.Y.S.2d 157 ). Here, the evidence submitted by the petitioner failed to demonstrate that GEICO General Insurance Company ever insured Joel (see Matter of Farmers Ins./Truck Ins. Exch. v. Terzulli, 112 A.D.3d 628, 975 N.Y.S.2d 915 ; Matter of Insurance Co. of State of Pa. v. Dentale, 32 A.D.3d 854, 821 N.Y.S.2d 115 ; Matter of Government Empls. Ins. Co. v. Williams–Staley, 288 A.D.2d 471, 733 N.Y.S.2d 74 ). Accordingly, we agree with the Supreme Court's determination to deny the amended petition and, in effect, dismiss the proceeding.
In light of our determination, the petitioner's remaining contention need not be reached.
DILLON, J.P., MALTESE, BARROS and CONNOLLY, JJ., concur.