Rawson v. Pyramid Champlain Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rawson v. Pyramid Champlain Co.

193 A.D.2d 1052, 600 N.Y.S.2d 672

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 28, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 193 A.D.2d 1052 (Rawson v. Pyramid Champlain Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rawson v. Pyramid Champlain Co., 193 A.D.2d 1052, 600 N.Y.S.2d 672 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment dismissing the third-party action on the ground that the real party in interest, CNA Insurance Companies, is attempting through the third-party action to be subrogated to a claim against its own insured (see, Pennsylvania Gen. Ins. Co. v Austin Powder Co., 68 NY2d 465, 468; Fowler v Stillwater Assocs., 169 AD2d 226, 227-228). Further, by requiring third-party defendant to procure insurance naming itself as an additional insured, third-party plaintiff waived any right of contribution or common-law indemnity up to the limits of the policies (see, Rocovich v Consolidated Edison Co., 167 AD2d 524, 526, affd 78 NY2d 509; Michalak v Consolidated Edison Co., 166 AD2d 213, 214, lv dismissed 77 NY2d 989). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Stone, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Balio, Lawton and Davis, JJ.

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

Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment dismissing the third-party action on the ground that the real party in interest, CNA Insurance Companies, is attempting through the third-party action to be subrogated to a claim against its own insured (see, Pennsylvania Gen. Ins. Co. v Austin Powder Co., 68 NY2d 465, 468; Fowler v Stillwater Assocs., 169 AD2d 226, 227-228). Further, by requiring third-party defendant to procure insurance naming itself as an additional insured, third-party plaintiff waived any right of contribution or common-law indemnity up to the limits of the policies (see, Rocovich v Consolidated Edison Co., 167 AD2d 524, 526, affd 78 NY2d 509; Michalak v Consolidated Edison Co., 166 AD2d 213, 214, lv dismissed 77 NY2d 989). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Stone, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Balio, Lawton and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

193 A.D.2d 1052, 600 N.Y.S.2d 672, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rawson-v-pyramid-champlain-co-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack