From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

MacKennan v. Am. Cas. Co. of Reading, Penn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 14, 1991
169 A.D.2d 709 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

January 14, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (King, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the Supreme Court properly directed the defendant surety to repay only those funds misappropriated from the conservatee's estate by the principal Edith M. Reardon. A surety's liability is derived from the liability of the principal, and thus as a general rule, a surety's liability may not exceed that of the principal (see, United States v Seaboard Sur. Co., 817 F.2d 956, cert denied 484 U.S. 855; Jones v Gelles, 167 A.D.2d 636; Riverside Iron Works v Insurance Co., 156 A.D.2d 919). Accordingly, the surety's liability at bar does not encompass funds misappropriated by the third-party defendant after the principal's death. Sullivan, J.P., Eiber, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

MacKennan v. Am. Cas. Co. of Reading, Penn

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 14, 1991
169 A.D.2d 709 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

MacKennan v. Am. Cas. Co. of Reading, Penn

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT A. MacKENNAN, as Temporary Substitute Conservator for HELEN H…

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

Date published: Jan 14, 1991

Citations

169 A.D.2d 709 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
564 N.Y.S.2d 462

Citing Cases

West-Fair Electric Contractors v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

Under New York law a surety's duty generally is coextensive with that of the principal on the bond. See…

Town of Huntington v. America Manufacturers Mut. Ins. Co.

Accordingly, the Court finds that the Stipulation Discontinuing Action with Prejudice filed in connection…