Legal Opinion

Driscoll v. Corwin

New York Supreme Court

Decided March 15, 1929PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtRodenbeck, J.

The defendant claims to have a bond of indemnity from the Rochester Auto Parts, Inc., principal, and the American Surety Company, surety, protecting him against a claim which the plaintiff is making against him, and asks to have the Rochester Auto Parts, Inc., and the American Surety Company brought in as defendants, so that not only his liability to the plaintiff but the liability of the Rochester Auto Parts, Inc., and the American Surety Company to him may be determined in one action. This motion is countenanced by subdivision 2 of section 193 of the Civil Practice Act, a new provision,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Stern v. George P. Ide & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925
  2. Federal Lighterage Co. v. Italia-America Shipping Corp.Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 1925

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Hejza v. New York Central RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1930

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API