United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Franklin

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Franklin

43 A.D.2d 844, 352 N.Y.S.2d 1009, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5979

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

DecidedJanuary 14, 1974

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 43 A.D.2d 844 (United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Franklin) 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

United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Franklin, 43 A.D.2d 844, 352 N.Y.S.2d 1009, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5979 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action for a declaratory judgment, plaintiff appeals from an order-judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated June 15, 1973, which, on plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, rendered a declaration that plaintiff “ is required to.furnish a defense and insurance coverage to” defendant Jerry A. Franklin for claims of indemnification of the defendants Buckner and Callier for injuries sustained by Franklin’s wife, defendant Carrie Franklin. Order-judgment affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements (see State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Go. v. Westlake, 43 A D 2d 314 [decided herewith]). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Shapiro, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur; Benjamin, J., dissents and votes to [845]*845reverse and to grant plaintiff’s motion, upon the-grounds stated in Ms dissenting opinion in ■State Farm Mut.. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Westlake (43 A D 2d 314 [decided herewith]). [74 Mise 2d 606.]

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

In an action for a declaratory judgment, plaintiff appeals from an order-judgment of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated June 15, 1973, which, on plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, rendered a declaration that plaintiff “ is required to.furnish a defense and insurance coverage to” defendant Jerry A. Franklin for claims of indemnification of the defendants Buckner and Callier for injuries sustained by Franklin’s wife, defendant Carrie Franklin. Order-judgment affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements (see State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Go. v. Westlake, 43 A D 2d 314 [decided herewith]). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Shapiro, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur; Benjamin, J., dissents and votes to [845]*845reverse and to grant plaintiff’s motion, upon the-grounds stated in Ms dissenting opinion in ■State Farm Mut.. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Westlake (43 A D 2d 314 [decided herewith]). [74 Mise 2d 606.]

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

43 A.D.2d 844, 352 N.Y.S.2d 1009, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5979, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-fidelity-guaranty-co-v-franklin-nyappdiv-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack