From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kalinsky v. Square

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 26, 2007
41 A.D.3d 785 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)

Opinion

No. 2005-08815.

June 26, 2007.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Hallen Construction Company, Inc., appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bayne, J.), dated July 20, 2005, which, upon a jury verdict finding the defendant Jeffrey L. Square 65% at fault, the defendant Hallen Construction Company, Inc., 18% at fault, and the defendant Brooklyn Union Gas Company 17% at fault in the happening of the accident, granted the oral application of the defendant Brooklyn Union Gas Company for contractual indemnification against it.

Morris Duffy Alonso Faley, New York, N.Y. (Pauline E. Glaser and Kevin G. Faley of counsel), for appellant.

Cullen and Dykman, LLP, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Gregory M. Koch of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Florio, J.P., Fisher, Carni and McCarthy, JJ.


Ordered that on the Court's own motion, the notice of appeal is deemed an application for leave to appeal, and leave to appeal is granted ( see CPLR 5701 [c]); and it is further,

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the oral application of the defendant Brooklyn Union Gas Company for contractual indemnification against the defendant Hallen Construction Company, Inc., is denied.

In light of the jury's findings that the defendant Brooklyn Union Gas Company (hereinafter BUG) was negligent and that such negligence wais a substantial factor in causing the subject accident, BUG was barred, under General Obligations Law § 5-322.1, from seeking contractual indemnification against the defendant Hallen Construction Company, Inc., pursuant to a broadly-worded provision contemplating full indemnification ( see Itri Brick Concrete Corp. v Aetna Cas. Sur. Co., 89 NY2d 786, 795; Brooks v Judlau Contr., Inc., 39 AD3d 447; Flores v Jeffrey M. Brown Constr. Assoc., 28 AD3d 711, 712; Carriere v Whiting Turner Contr., 299 AD2d 509, 511). Accordingly, the Supreme Court erred in granting BUG's oral application for contractual indemnification.

The parties' remaining contentions either are improperly raised for the first time on appeal or without merit.


Summaries of

Kalinsky v. Square

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 26, 2007
41 A.D.3d 785 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
Case details for

Kalinsky v. Square

Case Details

Full title:DARIUSZ KALINSKY et al., Plaintiffs, v. JEFFREY L. SQUARE et al.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jun 26, 2007

Citations

41 A.D.3d 785 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
838 N.Y.S.2d 662

Citing Cases

Velez v. Fifth Avenue Jewelers Exchange

Since it cannot be said that indemnification for claims by LVI's employees was "the unmistakable intent of…

Tarpey v. Kolanu Partners, LLC

Furthermore, the blanket agreement violates General Obligation Law § 5-322.1, as it requires the…