From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Apollo Steel Corp. v. Melco Cranes, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 11, 1994
202 A.D.2d 1049 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

March 11, 1994

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Niagara County, Rath, Jr., J.

Present — Balio, J.P., Lawton, Doerr, Davis and Boehm, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: An employee of Apollo Steel Corporation (Apollo) was injured when a box tank fell from a crane provided by defendant and operated by defendant's employee. Apollo commenced this action, alleging that, as a result of that accident, its workers' compensation insurance premium increased by 17% and its experience rating was raised to a level where it was disqualified from bidding on certain contracts that customarily constituted a substantial part of its business. Apollo sought as damages the increased cost of premiums and lost profits.

Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Those items of damage are, as a matter of law, too remote and speculative to be compensable. Although the accident may have contributed to Apollo's increased premium cost and new experience rating, those consequences resulted from a myriad of events and factors considered in the establishment of the rating and in the insurer's establishment of a premium. The alleged damage cannot "be reasonably traced to the event" and was not "independent of other causes" (Steitz v. Gifford, 280 N.Y. 15, 20).


Summaries of

Apollo Steel Corp. v. Melco Cranes, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 11, 1994
202 A.D.2d 1049 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Apollo Steel Corp. v. Melco Cranes, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:APOLLO STEEL CORPORATION, Appellant, v. MELCO CRANES, INC., Respondent

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Mar 11, 1994

Citations

202 A.D.2d 1049 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
609 N.Y.S.2d 121

Citing Cases

World Trade Center Properties LLC v. Am. Airlines, Inc. (In re Sept. 11 Litig.)

This series of events is too attenuated to support a claim for attorneys' fees. See Martinez v. Lazaroff, 48…

Ilic v. Rochester Gas & Electric Corp.

Supreme Court properly granted that part of defendant's motion for partial summary judgment seeking dismissal…