February 26, 2007

Superior Med. Equip. v Hudson Ins. Co. (2007 NY Slip Op 50411(U))

Headnote

The court considered the denial of a petition to vacate a master arbitrator's award regarding first-party no-fault benefits. The main issue was whether there was a rational basis for the master arbitrator's determination upholding the arbitrator's award, which denied the petitioner's claims. The court held that there was a rational basis for the determination of the master arbitrator and affirmed the denial of the petition to vacate the award. However, the court modified the order by adding a provision confirming the master arbitrator's award. The court noted that a special proceeding should terminate in a judgment, not an order.

Reported in New York Official Reports at Superior Med. Equip. v Hudson Ins. Co. (2007 NY Slip Op 50411(U))

Superior Med. Equip. v Hudson Ins. Co. (2007 NY Slip Op 50411(U)) [*1]

Superior Med. Equip. v Hudson Ins. Co.

2007 NY Slip Op 50411(U) [14 Misc 3d 145(A)]

Decided on February 26, 2007

Appellate Term, Second Department

Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.

This opinion is uncorrected and will not be published in the printed Official Reports.

Decided on February 26, 2007

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

APPELLATE TERM: 2nd and 11th JUDICIAL DISTRICTS

PRESENT:: PESCE, P.J., GOLIA and BELEN, JJ
2006-272 K C.

Superior Medical Equipment and Supply Inc. a/a/o Vidol Quashie, Appellant,
against
Hudson Insurance Company, Respondent.

Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Ellen M. Spodek, J.), entered April 1, 2005. The order denied the petition to vacate the master arbitrator’s award.

Order modified by adding thereto a provision confirming the master arbitrator’s award; as so modified, affirmed without costs.

Upon a review of the record, we find a rational basis for the determination of the master arbitrator upholding the arbitrator’s award which denied the petitioner’s claims for first-party no-fault benefits (see Matter of Petrofsky [Allstate Ins. Co.], 54 NY2d 207 [1981]). Accordingly, the court below properly denied the petition to vacate the master
arbitrator’s award. However, upon denying the petition, the court was required, pursuant to CPLR 7511 (e), to confirm the award (see Matter of Exclusive Med. & Diagnostic v Government Empls. Ins. Co., 306 AD2d 476 [2003]).

We note that a special proceeding should terminate in a judgment, not an order (see CPLR 411).

Pesce, P.J., Golia and Belen, JJ., concur. [*2]
Decision Date: February 26, 2007