Legal Opinion
St. Charles Hospital & Rehabilitation Center v. Royal Globe Insurance
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided April 16, 2001PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
—In an action for a judgment declaring that the defendants Royal Globe Insurance Company and Royal Insurance Company of America are required to defend and indemnify the plaintiff in an underlying action *594entitled Mulholland v St. Charles Hosp., pending in the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, under Index No. 3941/95, Royal Globe Insurance Company and Royal Insurance of America appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Berler, J.), entered June 14, 2000, which, upon renewal, inter alia, granted the plaintiff’s motion for leave to enter a default judgment against them.
Ordered that…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- White v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
- Tat Sang Kwong v. Budge-Wood Laundry Service, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
- Lefkowitz v. Kaye, Scholer, Fierman, Hays & HandlerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- Frenchy's Bar & Grill v. United International InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- Coven v. Trust Co. of New JerseyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Eastern Resource Service, Inc. v. Mountbatten Surety Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- Wilson v. Sawmill Woodworking, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001