Legal Opinion · Dissent
Metro-North Commuter Railroad v. Yonkers Contracting Co.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 3, 1998Published
1DissentMilonas, J.
Metro-North acquired a policy from National Union to cover “force account workers” on a particular tunnel project site. Because the National Union policy failed to cover certain other Metro-North employees, specifically flagmen (because they did not work in the tunnel itself) and inspection personnel (because they were managerial employees), Metro-North sought to provide coverage for these particular employees by obtaining from Lloyd’s a separate policy solely for their benefit and to the extent of this limited exposure. The record unequivocally establishes that, according to both Metro-North…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Chimart Associates v. PaulNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- William P. Pahl Equipment Corp. v. KassisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- Nash v. KornblumNew York Court of Appeals · 1962
- Baby Togs, Inc. v. Harold Trimming Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979
- Prudential Insurance Co. of America v. S.S. American LancerDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1988