From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hayes v. City

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 31, 2001
279 A.D.2d 610 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Summary

In Hayes, the Appellate Division found that the indemnification clause at issue was enforceable under GOL § 5-321 because it only covered a "loss caused by the negligent acts of the tenant and/or its employees" (see Hayes v City of New York, 279 AD2d at 610).

Summary of this case from WILLIAMS v. JEFFREY MANAGEMENT COMPANY

Opinion

January 31, 2001.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant third-party plaintiff Rouse Si Shopping Center, Inc., appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Sangiorgio, J.), dated December 9, 1999, which (1) granted that branch of the motion of the third-party defendant, Just Shirts Staten Island, Ltd., for partial summary judgment dismissing its claim for indemnification, and (2), in effect, sua sponte, dismissed its claim for contribution.

Jones Hirsch Connors Bull, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Richard Imbrogno of counsel), for defendant third-party plaintiff-appellant.

Gregory J. Parisi, Mineola, N.Y. (Robin Mary Heaney of counsel), for third-party defendant-respondent.

Before: MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P., GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, LEO F. McGINITY, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that on the court's own motion, that portion of the notice of appeal which purports to appeal as of right from so much of the order as, in effect, sua sponte dismissed the appellant's claim for contribution, is deemed to be a motion for leave to appeal from that portion of the order, and leave to appeal is granted (see, CPLR 5701[c]); and it is further,

ORDERED that the order is reversed, that branch of the motion which was for partial summary judgment is denied, and the third-party complaint is reinstated; and it is further,

ORDERED that the appellant is awarded one bill of costs.

The indemnification clause at issue only covers loss caused by the negligent acts of the tenant and/or its employees, and thus, it is enforceable under General Obligations Law § 5-321 (cf., Itri Brick Concrete Corp. v. Aetna Cas. Sur. Co., 89 N.Y.2d 786, 795; Kowalewski v. North General Hospital, 266 A.D.2d 114). Further, there exist triable issues of fact as to whether the plaintiff's employer was separately negligent for the happening of the occurrence (see, Freeman v. Diamond Chemical Co., Inc., 221 A.D.2d 413). Accordingly, the Supreme Court erred in dismissing the third-party complaint.


Summaries of

Hayes v. City

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 31, 2001
279 A.D.2d 610 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

In Hayes, the Appellate Division found that the indemnification clause at issue was enforceable under GOL § 5-321 because it only covered a "loss caused by the negligent acts of the tenant and/or its employees" (see Hayes v City of New York, 279 AD2d at 610).

Summary of this case from WILLIAMS v. JEFFREY MANAGEMENT COMPANY

In Hayes, the Appellate Division found that the indemnification clause at issue was enforceable under GOL § 5-321 because it only covered a "loss caused by the negligent acts of the tenant and/or its employees" (see Hayes v City of New York, 279 AD2d at 610).

Summary of this case from WILLIAMS v. JEFFREY MGT. CO.
Case details for

Hayes v. City

Case Details

Full title:KRISTINE HAYES, plaintiff, v. CITY OF NEW York, defendant, ROUSE SI…

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

Date published: Jan 31, 2001

Citations

279 A.D.2d 610 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
720 N.Y.S.2d 362

Citing Cases

WILLIAMS v. JEFFREY MGT. CO.

JMC/3601 cites to Picchione v Sweet Construction Corp. ( 60 AD3d 510, supra), Great Northern Insurance Co. v…

WILLIAMS v. JEFFREY MANAGEMENT COMPANY

JMC/3601 cites to Picchione v Sweet Construction Corp. ( 60 AD3d 510, supra), Great Northern Insurance Co. v…