Legal Opinion · Dissent

Brooklyn Yarn Dye Co. v. Empire State Warehouses Corp.

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

Decided April 24, 1950Published

1DissentWenzel, J.

Condition F provides that “ No

action shall lie against the company unless * * * I find no warrant for inserting in the clause the words “by the claimant” so as to limit the unequivocal words “ no action ”, This is a contract between the insured and the insurer, and they would not, of course, attempt to bind a future claimant whose rights are fixed by statute. The paragraph makes specific reference to the assured and is clearly intended to affect the assured, (Litman v. Garfinkle, 193 Misc. 256.) Further, section 193-a of the Civil Practice Act is a procedural statute designed for the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Simpson v. . Foundation Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1911
  2. Litman v. GarfinkleNew York Supreme Court · 1948

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

Powered by the Exa API