From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rudey v. Brown, Harris, Stevens, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 20, 1998
254 A.D.2d 133 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

October 20, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Elliott Wilk, J.).


Since the complaint in the main action does not sound exclusively as one for breach of contract, but premises the right to recovery as well upon an independent negligence theory, defendant and third-party plaintiff managing agent may assert a claim for contribution against third-party defendant Landmark Commission ( see, Crosby v. Ogden Servs Corp., 236 A.D.2d 220). The Landmark Commission may not further litigate the issue of whether it duly filed an historic designation for the subject property since we addressed this issue dispositively in a related CPLR article 78 proceeding, Matter of Rudey v. Landmarks Preservation Commn. ( 182 A.D.2d 61, 63, aff'd 82 N.Y.2d 832). Relitigation by the Landmark Commission is now barred by the doctrine of collateral estoppel since the issue has already been fully and fairly litigated and thereafter finally decided against the Commission.

Concur — Lerner, P.J., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Ellerin and Rubin, JJ.


Summaries of

Rudey v. Brown, Harris, Stevens, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 20, 1998
254 A.D.2d 133 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Rudey v. Brown, Harris, Stevens, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:JOHN M. RUDEY et al., Plaintiffs, v. BROWN, HARRIS, STEVENS, INC.…

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

Date published: Oct 20, 1998

Citations

254 A.D.2d 133 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
679 N.Y.S.2d 296

Citing Cases

Cobb v. City of New York

Nonetheless, we decline to direct a new inquest on these claims. Plaintiff is precluded from relitigating any…