Home/S.D. New York/Borah, Goldstein, Altschuler, Nahins & Goidel, P.C. v. Continental Casualty Company

Borah, Goldstein, Altschuler, Nahins & Goidel, P.C. v. Continental Casualty Company

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided February 21, 2023·No. 1:22-cv-01788·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK BORAH, GOLDSTEIN, ALTSCHULER, NAHINS & GOIDEL, P.C., Plaintiff, -against- 22 CIVIL 1788 (LJL) JUDGMENT CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY, Defendant. wenn K It is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED: That for the reasons stated in the Court's Opinion and Order dated February 16, 2023, the motion to dismiss is GRANTED. Because Plaintiff has identified no facts it could allege that would support coverage under the Policy, the dismissal is with prejudice. See, e.g., Pac. Indem. Co., 2022 WL 2292769, at *5 (dismissing similar complaint with prejudice); Plaza Athenee Hotel Co. Ltd., 2022 WL 902647, at *4 (same). Dated: New York, New York February 21, 2023

RUBY J. KRAJICK

Clerkof Court BY: K MANGe Deputy Clerk

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

Borah, Goldstein, Altschuler, Nahins & Goidel, P.C. v. Continental Casualty Company, (S.D.N.Y. 2023).

Borah, Goldstein, Altschuler, Nahins & Goidel, P.C. v. Continental Casualty Company (Borah, Goldstein, Altschuler, Nahins & Goidel, P.C. v. Continental Casualty Company) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.