Grynbal v. Grynbal
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Dissent
Bennan, J. (dissenting).
The claimed absence of proof in the record concerning the plaintiff’s assignment to the defendant Grynbal’s carrier is immaterial. It should be noted that the defendants Mandel do not question that such an assignment existed, but, rather, inf eren tially challenge it on the ground that it may not have been executed pursuant to the Grynbal’s insurance policy provisions (cf. Miller v. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 29 A D 2d 982). Nevertheless, the plaintiff’s attorney, in his affirmation submitted on the motion to reargue, averred that such an assignment occurred. This…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- De Cruz v. ReidCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Mid-Central Mutual Casualty Co. v. SpanjerAppellate Court of Illinois · 1968
- D'Amico v. ResnikNew York Supreme Court · 1960
- Seidel v. MaynardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1951
- Lehr v. City of New YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1961