Beneficial National Life Co v. Small

184 A.D.2d 241, 586 N.Y.S.2d 749, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7695
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 4, 1992·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol H. Arber, J.), entered December 1, 1991, which, inter alia, granted defendants Small and Raichlin’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the causes of action pleaded in plaintiff’s complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff failed to state any independent theory of liability as against the defendant insurance agents, except those sounding in indemnity or contribution. Since the plaintiff insurer prevailed in the main action, no subsequent claim of indem[242]*242nity and/or contribution may be asserted (cf., Ulysse v Nelsk Taxi, 135 AD2d 528, lv denied 73 NY2d 702; compare, Cohen Agency v Perlman Agency, 51 NY2d 358). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Asch, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Beneficial National Life Co v. Small, 184 A.D.2d 241, 586 N.Y.S.2d 749, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7695 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

184 A.D.2d 241 (Beneficial National Life Co v. Small) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Watson v. Newell Industries, Inc.
67 A.D.3d 780 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Sudul v. Computer Outsourcing Services, Inc.
917 F. Supp. 1033 (S.D. New York, 1996)