Onebeacon Am. Ins. Co. v. Colgate–Palmolive Co.

Full title: ONEBEACON AMERICA INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff–Appellant, v…

Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Jun 14, 2012

96 A.D.3d 541 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)

96 A.D.3d 541

2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 4833

Opinion

2012-06-14

ONEBEACON AMERICA INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. COLGATE–PALMOLIVE COMPANY, Defendant–Respondent, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Defendant.

Hardin, Kundla, McKeon & Poletto, P.A., New York (George R. Hardin of counsel), for appellant. Anderson Kill & Olick, P.C., New York (Alexander Hardiman of counsel), for respondent.

ANDRIAS

Hardin, Kundla, McKeon & Poletto, P.A., New York (George R. Hardin of counsel), for appellant. Anderson Kill & Olick, P.C., New York (Alexander Hardiman of counsel), for respondent.
ANDRIAS, J.P., FRIEDMAN, SWEENY, MANZANET–DANIELS, ROMÁN, JJ.

Interim orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Carol R. Edmead, J.), entered November 10, 2011, which, inter alia, granted defendant Colgate–Palmolive Company's motion to stay this action, and stayed plaintiff's motion to compel discovery, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Supreme Court properly stayed this action pending the resolution of an appeal in a related action among the parties in Massachusetts ( seeCPLR 2201; Asher v. Abbott Labs., 307 A.D.2d 211, 763 N.Y.S.2d 555 [2003] ). The issues, relief sought, and parties in the two actions are substantially identical ( see id.). Plaintiff's argument that the Massachusetts action is no longer pending because it was dismissed is unavailing, since an appeal was taken from the order of dismissal ( see Rael Automatic Sprinkler Co. v. Solow Dev. Corp., 58 A.D.2d 600, 395 N.Y.S.2d 485 [1977]; D'Aprile v. Blythe, 53 A.D.2d 1059, 1060, 386 N.Y.S.2d 144 [1976] ). The duplication of effort, waste of judicial resources, and possibility of inconsistent rulings in the absence of a stay outweigh any prejudice to plaintiff resulting from the fact that defense counsel is located in New York ( see Asher, 307 A.D.2d at 212, 763 N.Y.S.2d 555), particularly since the materials that may be relevant to whether plaintiff is entitled to independent counsel, i.e., liability insurance policies, correspondence from the insurance companies, and the insurance claims files, and insurance company witnesses, are located in Massachusetts.