Coluccio v. Knopf

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Coluccio v. Knopf

68 Misc. 2d 784, 328 N.Y.S.2d 31, 1971 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1080

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedDecember 2, 1971

StatusPublished

This text of 68 Misc. 2d 784 (Coluccio v. Knopf) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Coluccio v. Knopf, 68 Misc. 2d 784, 328 N.Y.S.2d 31, 1971 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1080 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Defendant forwarded a summons to Allstate Insurance Company in connection with a 1968 personal injury action. It retained appellant to defend the action. Subsequently the carrier discovered that it was not the insurer for defendant at the time of said accident. Appellant should be permitted to withdraw as attorney for defendant.

An insurance contract cannot be created by estoppel where none existed before (Government Employees Ins. Co. v. Giugno, 61 Misc 2d 1092). Estoppel cannot be invoked to create a primary liability of the insurer for which all elements of a binding contract are necessary. In view of the appellant’s relationship to Allstate Insurance Company, it would be unwise to compel an attorney to represent a defendant whose position now conflicts with that of Allstate. The opposing interests would give rise to the creation of a situation disruptive of the long accepted concept of attorney-client relationship violating the underlying “ elements of trust and confidence on the part of the client and of undivided loyalty and devotion on the part of the attorney ’ ’ (Matter of Dunn, 205 N. Y. 398, 402).

[785]*785The determination herein shall not he decisive of any issue other than the withdrawal of the appellant based upon a possible conflict of interest.

The order should he reversed with $10 costs and motion granted.

Concur — Street, Lupiano and Markowitz, JJ.

Order reversed, etc.

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

Per Curiam.

Defendant forwarded a summons to Allstate Insurance Company in connection with a 1968 personal injury action. It retained appellant to defend the action. Subsequently the carrier discovered that it was not the insurer for defendant at the time of said accident. Appellant should be permitted to withdraw as attorney for defendant.

An insurance contract cannot be created by estoppel where none existed before (Government Employees Ins. Co. v. Giugno, 61 Misc 2d 1092). Estoppel cannot be invoked to create a primary liability of the insurer for which all elements of a binding contract are necessary. In view of the appellant’s relationship to Allstate Insurance Company, it would be unwise to compel an attorney to represent a defendant whose position now conflicts with that of Allstate. The opposing interests would give rise to the creation of a situation disruptive of the long accepted concept of attorney-client relationship violating the underlying “ elements of trust and confidence on the part of the client and of undivided loyalty and devotion on the part of the attorney ’ ’ (Matter of Dunn, 205 N. Y. 398, 402).

[785]*785The determination herein shall not he decisive of any issue other than the withdrawal of the appellant based upon a possible conflict of interest.

The order should he reversed with $10 costs and motion granted.

Concur — Street, Lupiano and Markowitz, JJ.

Order reversed, etc.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

68 Misc. 2d 784, 328 N.Y.S.2d 31, 1971 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1080, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/coluccio-v-knopf-nyappterm-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack