From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Russo v. Pacific of New York Group

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 6, 1967
28 A.D.2d 1130 (N.Y. App. Div. 1967)

Opinion

November 6, 1967


In an action for a declaratory judgment as to the disclaimer by defendants, two insurance companies, of liability upon a certain automobile liability policy, MVAIC appeals from (1) two decisions of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated April 17, 1967 and May 8, 1967, respectively, and, (2) as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of said court dated June 2, 1967 as, on reargument, adhered to the original decision denying MVAIC's motion for leave to intervene as a party defendant. Appeals dismissed insofar as they are from the decisions, without costs. No appeal lies from a decision. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, with $10 costs and disbursements against defendants, and said motion granted. MVAIC may serve its answer within 10 days after entry of the order to be made hereon. Plaintiff was injured in an automobile accident on which defendant carriers disclaimed laibility because their insured had failed to give notice of the accident to them. A separate action was brought by plaintiff against the insured for damages to recover for personal injuries. MVAIC should be made a party defendant and, under the circumstances present herein, its application to intervene was not untimely ( MVAIC v. National Grange Mut. Ins. Co., 26 A.D.2d 6, affd. 19 N.Y.2d 115). Beldock, P.J., Brennan, Rabin, Hopkins and Benjamin, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Russo v. Pacific of New York Group

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 6, 1967
28 A.D.2d 1130 (N.Y. App. Div. 1967)
Case details for

Russo v. Pacific of New York Group

Case Details

Full title:JOSEPH RUSSO, Respondent, v. PACIFIC OF NEW YORK GROUP et al.…

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

Date published: Nov 6, 1967

Citations

28 A.D.2d 1130 (N.Y. App. Div. 1967)

Citing Cases

Ryder v. Travelers Insurance Company

There is a difference between a determination that MVAIC is not a necessary party under the statute (and even…

Brown v. Reid

(See CPLR 103, subd. [c]; 104.) A section 167 proceeding is designed only to protect injured plaintiffs (…