From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brooks v. Brooks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 9, 1996
227 A.D.2d 195 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

May 9, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Paula Omansky, J.).


Plaintiffs do not contend that defendants undertook any express obligation to indemnify them. Liability under a theory of implied indemnity would require some wrongful conduct by defendants ( see, Trustees of Columbia Univ. v. Mitchell/Giurgola Assocs., 109 A.D.2d 449), and a duty owed by defendants to plaintiffs ( see, Prudential-Bache Sec. v. Resnick Water St. Dev. Co., 161 A.D.2d 456, 457-458). Plaintiffs have offered nothing but vague, conclusory and, ultimately, inadequate allegations as to these elements ( see, Marine Midland Bank v. Embassy E., 160 A.D.2d 420, 422).

Concur — Milonas, J.P., Rosenberger, Rubin, Kupferman and Tom, JJ.


Summaries of

Brooks v. Brooks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 9, 1996
227 A.D.2d 195 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Brooks v. Brooks

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL BROOKS et al., Appellants, v. PHILLIP BROOKS et al., Respondents

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

Date published: May 9, 1996

Citations

227 A.D.2d 195 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
642 N.Y.S.2d 511

Citing Cases

WIRELESS NETWORK GROUP, INC. v. ARCC, INC.

Moreover, it is undisputed that S.W. Management did not control or supervise Wireless' work, nor the work of…