Legal Opinion
Chicago Insurance v. Kreitzer & Vogelman
District Court, S.D. New York
Decided July 17, 2002No. 97 Civ. 8619(RWS)PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SWEET, District Judge.
Plaintiff Chicago Insurance Company (“CIC”) has moved for the second time, pursuant to Rulé 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, for summary judgment declaring the propriety of its rescission of several lawyers’ professional responsibility policies (the “Policies”). It also moves to dismiss the claim of defendants Kreitzer & Vogelman (“K & V”) and David M. Kreit-zer (“Kreitzer”) that CIC has waived its right to rescind the Policies. The defendants, in turn, have also moved a second time in support of their contention that CIC waived its right to rescind the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Rodriguez v. City of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
- L. Smirlock Realty Corp. v. Title Guarantee Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1981
- Gibbs-Alfano v. BurtonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2002
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Continental Casualty Co. v. Marshall Granger & Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 2014
- Executive Risk Indemnity Inc. v. HamiltonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- Diaz v. SmithDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2022