Legal Opinion · Concurrence

City of New York v. Zurich American Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided April 5, 2007Published

1ConcurrenceMcGuire, J.

I *240agree that the order appealed from should be affirmed but write separately to underscore that this appeal resolves only a narrow issue. Defendant insurer Zurich’s sole argument on appeal is that the stipulation discontinuing with prejudice the underlying personal injury claims against its named insured, American Bridge Company, precludes any finding in the underlying action that plaintiff City’s liability arose out of either American Bridge’s work for the City or the City’s supervision of that work. The City is an additional insured under the policy Zurich issued to American Bridge but only…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. North Star Reinsurance Corp. v. Continental InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
  2. BP Air Conditioning Corp. v. One Beacon Insurance GroupAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
  3. Chelsea Associates, LLC v. Laquila-PinnacleAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
  4. City of Niagara Falls v. Merchants Insurance GroupAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
  5. Harriman Estates Development Corp. v. General Accident InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003

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

Powered by the Exa API