From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cenven, Inc. v. Bethlehem Steel Corporation

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Feb 15, 1977
41 N.Y.2d 842 (N.Y. 1977)

Opinion

Argued January 13, 1977

Decided February 15, 1977

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, CHARLES S. WHITMAN, JR., J.

Steven Di Joseph and John J. Bower for appellant.

William T. Ryan and John R. O'Connor for respondent.


MEMORANDUM. Order affirmed, with costs.

(See Wagman v American Fid. Cas. Co., 304 N.Y. 490, esp 494-495; Lamberti v Anaco Equip. Corp., 16 A.D.2d 121, esp 123-124.) It would be unwise to proliferate fine distinctions from and exceptions to the now judicially determined language "loading and unloading", absent other qualifying language establishing a contrary meaning or ambiguity, either in an indemnification agreement or in an insurance policy. Moreover, the doctrine of stare decisis should not be departed from except under compelling circumstances (cf. People v Hobson, 39 N.Y.2d 479, 487-491; Matter of Eckart, 39 N.Y.2d 493, 498-500; see, also, Matter of Garwitt, 41 N.Y.2d 845).

Chief Judge BREITEL and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and COOKE concur in a memorandum.

Order affirmed.


Summaries of

Cenven, Inc. v. Bethlehem Steel Corporation

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Feb 15, 1977
41 N.Y.2d 842 (N.Y. 1977)
Case details for

Cenven, Inc. v. Bethlehem Steel Corporation

Case Details

Full title:CENVEN, INC., et al., Plaintiffs, v. BETHLEHEM STEEL CORPORATION et al.…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Feb 15, 1977

Citations

41 N.Y.2d 842 (N.Y. 1977)
393 N.Y.S.2d 700
362 N.E.2d 251

Citing Cases

People v. Aarons

The doctrine of stare decisis stands as a check on a court's temptation to overrule recent precedent. Only…

Gerrish v. 56 Leonard LLC

We should adhere to precedent unless it is clear that a prior decision has produced an unjust or unworkable…