From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fleming v. Custom Bldg. Systems, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 12, 2005
21 A.D.3d 929 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

Opinion

2004-07138.

September 12, 2005.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the third-party defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Horowitz, J.), dated June 8, 2004, as denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint.

Goldberg Segalla, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. (Joel R. Appelbaum and William G. Kelly of counsel), for third-party defendant-appellant.

Baxter Smith, P.C., Jericho, N.Y. (Sim R. Shapiro of counsel), for defendant third-party plaintiff-respondent.

Before: Prudenti, P.J., Florio, Crane and Lifson, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

There are triable issues of fact which preclude summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint for indemnification and contribution ( see Murphy v. WFP 245 Park Co., L.P., 8 AD3d 161, 162; Bornschein v. Shuman, 7 AD3d 476, 479; cf. O'Donoghue v. New York City School Constr. Auth., 1 AD3d 333, 336). Thus, the third-party defendant's motion was properly denied.


Summaries of

Fleming v. Custom Bldg. Systems, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 12, 2005
21 A.D.3d 929 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
Case details for

Fleming v. Custom Bldg. Systems, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:RAYMOND FLEMING, Plaintiff, v. CUSTOM BUILDING SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant…

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

Date published: Sep 12, 2005

Citations

21 A.D.3d 929 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 6651
800 N.Y.S.2d 643

Citing Cases

Hill v. Town of Brookhaven

As Kromhout is not entitled to indemnification at this juncture, he is also not entitled to a defense (see…

Berberich v. Double G. Realty Corp.

Genuine questions of fact regarding liability on the part of Double G for the plaintiff's fall were not…