Sinclair's Deli, Inc. v. Associated Mutual Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sinclair's Deli, Inc. v. Associated Mutual Insurance

196 A.D.2d 644, 601 N.Y.S.2d 625, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8309

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 30, 1993·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinions

In an action to recover insurance benefits, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), entered December 21, 1990, which granted the motion of defendant Bernard Fleischer Associates, Inc., for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the conclusion of the Supreme Court that the plaintiff failed to establish that it was in privity with the defendant Bernard Fleischer Associates, Inc. (hereinafter Fleischer), or that the parties were in a relationship sufficiently approaching privity. Thus, Fleischer may not be held liable for its alleged negligent misrepresentations to the plaintiff (see, Security Pac. Bus. Credit v Peat Marwick Main & Co., 79 NY2d 695; W. C. Humphreys, Inc. v Zurich Ins. Co., 54 Mise 2d 659). Thompson, J. P., Rosenblatt and Miller, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover insurance benefits, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), entered December 21, 1990, which granted the motion of defendant Bernard Fleischer Associates, Inc., for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We agree with the conclusion of the Supreme Court that the plaintiff failed to establish that it was in privity with the defendant Bernard Fleischer Associates, Inc. (hereinafter Fleischer), or that the parties were in a relationship sufficiently approaching privity. Thus, Fleischer may not be held liable for its alleged negligent misrepresentations to the plaintiff (see, Security Pac. Bus. Credit v Peat Marwick Main & Co., 79 NY2d 695; W. C. Humphreys, Inc. v Zurich Ins. Co., 54 Mise 2d 659). Thompson, J. P., Rosenblatt and Miller, JJ., concur.

Sinclair's Deli, Inc. v. Associated Mutual Insurance, 196 A.D.2d 644, 601 N.Y.S.2d 625, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8309 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

196 A.D.2d 644 (Sinclair's Deli, Inc. v. Associated Mutual Insurance) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinions

Related