From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of TIG Ins. Co. v. Pellegrini

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 22, 1999
258 A.D.2d 658 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

February 22, 1999

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Feuerstein, J.).


Ordered that the order and judgment is reversed, on the law, with costs, the petition is denied, and the parties are directed to proceed to arbitration.

The Supreme Court granted the petition to permanently stay arbitration of Peter Pellegrini's underinsured motorist claim on the ground that he failed to obtain consent from the petitioner to settle with the tortfeasor's liability insurance carrier prior to settlement. A review of the record reveals that the petitioner first raised this claim concerning consent in its reply papers. "The function of reply papers is to address arguments made in opposition to the position taken by the movant and not to permit the movant to introduce new arguments in support of, or new grounds for the motion" (Dannasch v. Bifulco, 184 A.D.2d 415, 417). Since the appellant did not have the opportunity to oppose that newly-raised claim in a surreply (cf., Basile v. Grand Union Co., 196 A.D.2d 836), it was improper for the court to have granted the petition based upon it.

Mangano, P. J., Santucci, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Matter of TIG Ins. Co. v. Pellegrini

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 22, 1999
258 A.D.2d 658 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Matter of TIG Ins. Co. v. Pellegrini

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of TIG INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent, v. PETER PELLEGRINI…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Feb 22, 1999

Citations

258 A.D.2d 658 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
685 N.Y.S.2d 777

Citing Cases

Allstate v. Dawkins

Contrary to Allstate's contention on appeal, the Supreme Court properly declined to address its argument,…

Yechieli v. Cty. N.Y

Accordingly, the Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in determining that a negative inference…