Legal Opinion
Downe Communications, Inc. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided October 30, 1975PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Memorandum. The order of the Appellate Division should be modified to the extent of granting defendant (and inter-pleading plaintiff) Aetna’s cross motion for summary judgment, directing that it be permitted to deposit the amount of its bond into court and, as so modified, affirmed, with costs to prevailing parties; and the question certified should be answered in the negative.
Since Aetna "may be exposed to multiple liability as a result of adverse claims”, it qualifies as a stakeholder (CPLR 1006, subd [a]) and may seek to be discharged pursuant to the provisions of CPLR 1006 (subd [f])…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Esselstyn v. Union Surety & Guaranty Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1903
- Subin v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1960
- Gimenez v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1934
- Dayon v. Downe Communications, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1973
- Dayon v. Downe Communications, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1973
3Cited by2 opinions
- Martin v. Consolidated Edison Co. of N. Y., Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1990
- Considine v. PichlerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979