Opinion
January 18, 1994
Appeal from the Surrogate's Court, Nassau County (Radigan, S.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Bank of New York contends that Cusack Stiles should be disqualified as counsel for United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company (hereinafter USFG) because Cusack Stiles was simultaneously representing the Bank of New York in Rosenberg v Bank of N.Y., pending in the Supreme Court, New York County, Index No. 2065791, while prosecuting a claim on behalf of USFG against the Bank of New York. We disagree.
Cusack Stiles has met its burden of demonstrating the absence of any conflict in loyalties or impediments to a vigorous representation of each client (see, Aerojet Props. v. State of New York, 138 A.D.2d 39). Ritter, J.P., Copertino, Pizzuto and Joy, JJ., concur.