From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Monti v. Harran Transporation Co., Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 30, 1999
266 A.D.2d 440 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)

Opinion

Argued October 4, 1999

November 30, 1999

In related actions, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant Hicksville Union Free School District appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DeMaro, J.), dated June 24, 1998, which (1) granted the motion of the defendant Harran Transportation Co., Inc., to dismiss its cross claims for common-law indemnification, contractual indemnification, and to recover damages for breach of contract, and (2) denied its motions for summary judgment on those cross claims.

Kroll, Rubin Fiorella, LLP, Mineola, N.Y. (Stanley E. Orzechowski of counsel), for appellant.

Clark, Gagliardi Miller, P.C., White Plains, N.Y. (Lawrence T. D'Aloise, Jr., of counsel), for respondent.

GUY JAMES MANGANO, P.J., LAWRENCE J. BRACKEN, SONDRA MILLER, THOMAS R. SULLIVAN, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The underlying actions did not concern events covered under the indemnification clause of the agreement entered into between the defendants Harran Transportation Co., Inc. (hereinafter Harran), and Hicksville Union Free School District (hereinafter Hicksville). Accordingly, Harran did not breach the agreement when it refused to defend or indemnify Hicksville in the underlying actions ( see, Hooper Assocs. v. AGS Computers, 74 N.Y.2d 487; Ghaly v. First American Title Ins. Co. of New York, 260 A.D.2d 535 [2d Dept., Apr. 19, 1999]; Szalkowski v. Asbestospray Corp., 259 A.D.2d 867 [3d Dept., Mar. 11, 1999]; Sievert v. Morlef Holding Co., 241 A.D.2d 445; Altchek v. DiGennaro, 214 A.D.2d 527).

Since Hicksville cannot be vicariously liable for Harran's negligence under the circumstances of the underlying actions, there is no basis for common-law indemnification ( see, Chainani v. Board of Educ. of City of N.Y., 87 N.Y.2d 370; Kagan v. Jacobs, 260 A.D.2d 442 [2d Dept., Apr. 12, 1999]).

Hicksville's remaining contentions are without merit.

MANGANO, P.J., BRACKEN, S. MILLER, and SULLIVAN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Monti v. Harran Transporation Co., Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 30, 1999
266 A.D.2d 440 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
Case details for

Monti v. Harran Transporation Co., Inc.

Case Details

Full title:MICHELLE MONTI, et al., plaintiffs, v. HARRAN TRANSPORTATION CO., INC.…

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

Date published: Nov 30, 1999

Citations

266 A.D.2d 440 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
698 N.Y.S.2d 871

Citing Cases

Gavigan v. Zerlin

LIJMC and the employee sought contractual indemnification from Adelphi for the expenses arising out of this…

Chen & Lin 7173 Realty LLC v. City of New York

If they are clear and unambiguous, it maintains that the terms are to be taken and understood in their plain,…