Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Hardina

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Hardina
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided March 26, 1996
225 A.D.2d 486; 639 N.Y.2d 374; 639 N.Y.S.2d 374; 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3089
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Hardina

Opinion of the Court

Prior to the demand for arbitration, respondent failed to *487advise petitioner of the offer to settle the underlying action and to seek petitioner’s consent to settle. Respondent also has not shown that petitioner’s right of subrogation would be preserved under the settlement agreement. Therefore, she has not satisfied the conditions precedent to arbitration (cf., Matter of Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. [King], 198 AD2d 421) and, accordingly, the petition to stay arbitration was properly granted. Concur — Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Wallach, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.