Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
COHOES REALTY ASSOCIATES, et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant.
Marshall & Sterling Upstate, Inc., Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff-Appellant, v. New England Risk Specialists, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.), entered February 8, 1999, which granted the motion of plaintiff Lana Realty Co. for renewal of its motion for summary judgment, and, upon renewal, granted plaintiff partial summary judgment against defendant Lexington Insurance Company on its third cause of action, and which granted the cross motion of third-party defendant New England Risk Specialists, Inc. (NERS) to dismiss the third-party complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion and cross motion both denied and the matter remanded for further proceedings.
It was an improvident exercise of Trial Term's discretion to grant renewal where this Court had affirmed its previous denial of summary judgment to plaintiffs and, upon a search of the record, granted summary judgment in favor of Lexington (250 A.D.2d 420, 673 N.Y.S.2d 4, lv. dismissed 92 N.Y.2d 1001, 684 N.Y.S.2d 188, 706 N.E.2d 1212), particularly where plaintiffs failed to demonstrate a justifiable excuse for not pursuing discovery against NERS more expeditiously (see, Matter of Beiny v. Wynyard, 132 A.D.2d 190, 209-210, 522 N.Y.S.2d 511, lv. dismissed, 71 N.Y.2d 994, 529 N.Y.S.2d 277, 524 N.E.2d 879). Since the grant of summary judgment to plaintiff was the sole basis for dismissing the third-party action, such dismissal is vacated and the third-party action reinstated.
MEMORANDUM DECISION.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: November 04, 1999
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)