From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Katz v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 26, 1994
203 A.D.2d 179 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

April 26, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Walter Tolub, J.).


Third-party defendant's challenge to third-party plaintiff's claim for indemnification is based on the doctrine of preindemnification squarely rejected by the Court of Appeals in North Star Reins. Corp. v Continental Ins. Co. ( 82 N.Y.2d 281, 291-294). Nor should third-party plaintiff's failure to timely notify its insurer of plaintiff's underlying claim, resulting in the loss of its own insurance coverage, defeat its separate right to indemnification. Third-party defendant's insurer received a premium to insure against the very risk upon which plaintiff recovered judgment, and its liability therefor should not be shared with a party who is only vicariously liable, regardless of whether that party has received or is entitled to receive any insurance proceeds on account of the judgment (supra, at 293-294). We have considered third-party defendant's other claims and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Murphy, P.J., Sullivan, Carro, Wallach and Asch, JJ.


Summaries of

Katz v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 26, 1994
203 A.D.2d 179 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Katz v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:SYLVIA KATZ et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Defendant and…

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

Date published: Apr 26, 1994

Citations

203 A.D.2d 179 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
610 N.Y.S.2d 521

Citing Cases

Katz v. City of New York

Since the City and/or its agent created the hazardous condition, no prior notice to the City of the hazard…