Legal Opinion

DeSanto Construction Corp. v. Royal Insurance of America

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

Decided December 18, 2000PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

In an action for a judgment declaring that the defendant is obligated to defend and indemnify the plaintiff in an underlying action for contractual indemnification and to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Lockman, J.), entered December 15, 1999, as denied its cross motion for summary judgment, and the plaintiff cross-appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of the same order as denied its motion for summary judgment.

Ordered that the order is modified, on the law, by deleting the provision thereof…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. O'Brien v. City of SyracuseNew York Court of Appeals · 1981
  2. Maheu v. Long Island RailroadAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
  3. New York State Dormitory Authority v. Board of Trustees of the Hyde Park Fire & Water DistrictAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Vigliotti v. North Shore University HospitalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
  2. Harley v. HawkinsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
  3. Maheu v. Long Island RailroadNew York Supreme Court · 2001
  4. Mooney v. Manhattan Occupational, Physical & Speech Therapies, PLLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2018

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

Powered by the Exa API