From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schorr Bros. Dev. Corp. v. Continental Ins. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 24, 1991
174 A.D.2d 722 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

June 24, 1991

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Leviss, J.).


Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements, and the cross motion is granted to the extent that it is directed that the third-party action be tried separately.

It has long been recognized that it is inherently prejudicial to third-party defendant insurers to have the issue of insurance coverage tried before the jury that considers the underlying liability claims (see, Kelly v Yannotti, 4 N.Y.2d 603; Dreizen v Morris I. Stoler, Inc., 98 A.D.2d 759; Mancuso v Bellerive, 50 A.D.2d 802; Schwartz v Woodner Co., 40 A.D.2d 1027). Thompson, J.P., Kunzeman, Eiber, Rosenblatt and Ritter, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Schorr Bros. Dev. Corp. v. Continental Ins. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 24, 1991
174 A.D.2d 722 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

Schorr Bros. Dev. Corp. v. Continental Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:SCHORR BROTHERS DEVELOPMENT CORP. et al., Plaintiffs, v. CONTINENTAL…

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

Date published: Jun 24, 1991

Citations

174 A.D.2d 722 (N.Y. App. Div. 1991)

Citing Cases

Hernandez-Panell v. Rozeas

However, severance is inappropriate where the claims against the defendants involve common factual and legal…

Wausau Business Insurance Co. v. Turner Construction Co.

Specifically, Nationwide cites numerous New York decisions severing insurance coverage suits from tort…