Turner Construction Co. v. H.E.L.P. Social Service Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Turner Construction Co. v. H.E.L.P. Social Service Corp.

43 A.D.3d 731, 841 N.Y.S.2d 448

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

DecidedSeptember 20, 2007

StatusPublished

This text of 43 A.D.3d 731 (Turner Construction Co. v. H.E.L.P. Social Service Corp.) 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

Turner Construction Co. v. H.E.L.P. Social Service Corp., 43 A.D.3d 731, 841 N.Y.S.2d 448 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

[732]*732Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Leland DeGrasse, J.), entered December 14, 2005, which denied defendant AIG’s motion for summary judgment on its counterclaims for defense and indemnification against plaintiff Liberty Mutual in connection with an underlying personal injury action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

AIG improperly sought to make successive, fragmentary motions for summary judgment in this matter {Phoenix Four v Albertini, 245 AD2d 166 [1997]). Prior to the order on the motion at issue herein, AIG had made a cross motion for summary judgment directed to the counterclaims, which was denied as premature because plaintiffs had not served a reply to AIG’s counterclaims. In its subsequent motion for summary judgment on its counterclaims, AIG attached a copy of plaintiffs’ reply to the counterclaims, which was dated April 30, 2003, prior to the notice of AIG’s earlier cross motion seeking the same relief. However, AIG offered no explanation for its failure to include a copy of the reply to its counterclaims in its earlier cross motion. We decline to consider the explanation AIG offers for the first time on this appeal. Concur—Andrias, J.E, Nardelli, Sweeny and McGuire, JJ.

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

[732]*732Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Leland DeGrasse, J.), entered December 14, 2005, which denied defendant AIG’s motion for summary judgment on its counterclaims for defense and indemnification against plaintiff Liberty Mutual in connection with an underlying personal injury action, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

AIG improperly sought to make successive, fragmentary motions for summary judgment in this matter {Phoenix Four v Albertini, 245 AD2d 166 [1997]). Prior to the order on the motion at issue herein, AIG had made a cross motion for summary judgment directed to the counterclaims, which was denied as premature because plaintiffs had not served a reply to AIG’s counterclaims. In its subsequent motion for summary judgment on its counterclaims, AIG attached a copy of plaintiffs’ reply to the counterclaims, which was dated April 30, 2003, prior to the notice of AIG’s earlier cross motion seeking the same relief. However, AIG offered no explanation for its failure to include a copy of the reply to its counterclaims in its earlier cross motion. We decline to consider the explanation AIG offers for the first time on this appeal. Concur—Andrias, J.E, Nardelli, Sweeny and McGuire, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

43 A.D.3d 731, 841 N.Y.S.2d 448, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/turner-construction-co-v-help-social-service-corp-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack