From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

E. 51st St. Dev. Co. v. Lincoln Gen. Ins. Co. (In re E. 51st St. Crane Collapse Litig.)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Oct 9, 2014
121 A.D.3d 458 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)

Opinion

2014-10-9

In re EAST 51ST STREET CRANE COLLAPSE LITIGATION East 51st Street Development Company, LLC, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Lincoln General Insurance Company, Defendant–Respondent, Axis Surplus Insurance Company, et al., Defendants, Interstate Fire and Casualty Company, Defendant–Appellant.

Lawrence, Worden, Rainis & Bard, P.C., Melville (Roger B. Lawrence of counsel), for appellant. Ruberry Stalmack & Garvey LLC, Chicago, IL (Richard M. Kuntz of the bar of the State of Illinois, admitted pro hac vice, of counsel), for respondent.


Lawrence, Worden, Rainis & Bard, P.C., Melville (Roger B. Lawrence of counsel), for appellant. Ruberry Stalmack & Garvey LLC, Chicago, IL (Richard M. Kuntz of the bar of the State of Illinois, admitted pro hac vice, of counsel), for respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol R. Edmead, J.), entered October 4, 2013, which granted the motion of defendant Lincoln General Insurance Company (Lincoln) for leave to amend its answer and cross claim against defendant Interstate Fire and Casualty Company (Interstate), unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The motion was properly granted as Lincoln's proposed amended answer and cross claim was not “palpably insufficient or patently devoid of merit” (MBIA Ins. Corp. v. Greystone & Co., Inc., 74 A.D.3d 499, 499, 901 N.Y.S.2d 522 [1st Dept.2010] ). Contrary to Interstate's contention that this Court declared in its February 5, 2013 order that Interstate has no obligation to pay any costs incurred in the defense of plaintiff East 51st Development Company LLC in underlying litigation and dismissed Lincoln's cross claim against Interstate seeking to recover such costs, this Court explicitly held that the Lincoln and Interstate policies are both primary and refused to dismiss Lincoln's cross claim against Interstate seeking to recover costs incurred in the defense of plaintiff ( see Matter of East 51st St. Crane Collapse Litig., 103 A.D.3d 401, 402, 960 N.Y.S.2d 364 [1st Dept.2013] ). GONZALEZ, P.J., SAXE, DeGRASSE, RICHTER, CLARK, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

E. 51st St. Dev. Co. v. Lincoln Gen. Ins. Co. (In re E. 51st St. Crane Collapse Litig.)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Oct 9, 2014
121 A.D.3d 458 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
Case details for

E. 51st St. Dev. Co. v. Lincoln Gen. Ins. Co. (In re E. 51st St. Crane Collapse Litig.)

Case Details

Full title:In re EAST 51ST STREET CRANE COLLAPSE LITIGATION East 51st Street…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Oct 9, 2014

Citations

121 A.D.3d 458 (N.Y. App. Div. 2014)
121 A.D.3d 458
2014 N.Y. Slip Op. 6859