Legal Opinion

Davis Yarn Co. v. Brooklyn Yarn Dye Co.

New York Court of Appeals

Decided July 19, 1944PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtConway, J.

The question presented here arises by reason of the fact thát a number of inland marine “floater ” policies covered the same goods and insured against the peril which occurred, and we must determine whether one of the policies must bear the entire burden, whether there shall be contribution between it and another or others or whether all of the policies, being of the same category, must contribute to the payment for the loss incurred.

The defendant, Brooklyn Yarn Dye Co., Inc. (hereinafter referred to as Brooklyn), was engaged in the business of dyeing yarns. The fifteen plaintiffs, who were…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Wilson Company v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1923
  2. Bloch v. American InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1907
  3. Federal Intermediate Credit Bank v. Globe & Rutgers Fire Ins.District Court, D. Maryland · 1934
  4. Cutting v. Atlas Mutual InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1908
  5. Klotz Tailoring Co. v. Eastern Fire InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1907

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Stecker v. American Home Fire Assurance Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1949
  2. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. SlifkinDistrict Court, N.D. Alabama · 1961
  3. Carlino v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1989
  4. Insurance Co. of North America v. Commissioner of InsuranceMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1956
  5. Starlight Fabrics, Inc. v. Glens Falls InsuranceNew York Court of Appeals · 1948

14 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