From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

American Home Assurance Company v. Flushing Sav. Bank

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Feb 19, 1981
420 N.E.2d 92 (N.Y. 1981)

Opinion

Argued January 5, 1981

Decided February 19, 1981

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, MAX BLOOM, J.

Robert L. Laufer, Jay Greenfield and Stephen D.D. Hamilton for appellants.

David B. Eizenman and Jerome M. Lasky for respondent.



MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

The court below was correct in determining that there is no justiciable dispute between plaintiffs and the Sackman-Gilliland Corporation (see Prashker v United States Guar. Co., 1 N.Y.2d 584). The existence of such a dispute necessarily must await the resolution of the underlying issues involving plaintiffs' possible liability. Moreover, plaintiffs have failed to show any wrongful acts on the part of Sackman.

Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and MEYER concur.

Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.


Summaries of

American Home Assurance Company v. Flushing Sav. Bank

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Feb 19, 1981
420 N.E.2d 92 (N.Y. 1981)
Case details for

American Home Assurance Company v. Flushing Sav. Bank

Case Details

Full title:AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY et al., Appellants, v. FLUSHING SAVINGS…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Feb 19, 1981

Citations

420 N.E.2d 92 (N.Y. 1981)
420 N.E.2d 92
438 N.Y.S.2d 294

Citing Cases

Menorah Nursing Home v. Zukov

Thus, Travelers is a contingent subrogee not only of the plaintiffs, but also of its principal Blitman.…