Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

In re the Estate of Corning

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

Decided May 2, 1985Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partLevine, J.

I dissent from so much of the majority’s decision as affirms Surrogate’s Court’s determination that the “book of business” marked “ECU” is the property of Albany Associates, Inc., rather than that of the estate of the late Erastus Corning, II. The majority and Surrogate’s Court reason that in the absence of an express contract between the parties, the American Agency System applies, under which, as a matter of custom and usage, ownership of the book of business (more commonly called the expirations) is awarded to the producer of the business, i.e., the agent or subagent who procured the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Miller v. . SchlossNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
  2. Jemzura v. JemzuraNew York Court of Appeals · 1975
  3. Garrett v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1974
  4. Woodruff v. Auto Owners InsuranceMichigan Supreme Court · 1942
  5. Ballagh v. Polk-Warren Mutual Insurance Ass'nSupreme Court of Iowa · 1965

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API