§Why CasetextPricing

Lend Lease (US) Construction LMB Inc., et al., Appellants,v.Zurich American Insurance Company, et al., Respondents.

Brief

21 Cited authorities

  1. White v. Continental Cas. Co.

    2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 9310 (N.Y. 2007)   Cited 383 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding if an insurance contract on its face is reasonably susceptible of only one meaning a court is not free to alter it

  2. Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y. v. Allstate Ins. Co.

    98 N.Y.2d 208 (N.Y. 2002)   Cited 436 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding that indemnity should be allocated pro rata

  3. Metropolitan Life v. Noble Lowndes

    84 N.Y.2d 430 (N.Y. 1994)   Cited 221 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding proof that “defendant's repudiation of the Agreement was motivated exclusively by its own economic self-interest” is insufficient to show willful misconduct

  4. Columbia v. Continental Ins. Co.

    83 N.Y.2d 618 (N.Y. 1994)   Cited 171 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding "it is settled that in construing an endorsement to an insurance policy, the endorsement and the policy must be read together, and the words of the policy remain in full force and effect except as altered by the words of the endorsement"

  5. 242-44 East 77th Street, LLC v. Greater New York Mutual Insurance

    31 A.D.3d 100 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)   Cited 86 times
    Noting that "the meaning of a word in a series of words is determined by the company it keeps"

  6. Duane Reade v. Cardtronics

    54 A.D.3d 137 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)   Cited 78 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Reversing the granting of a motion to dismiss, holding that the subject contract provision, in context, was ambiguous

  7. Muzak Corp. v. Hotel Taft Corp.

    1 N.Y.2d 42 (N.Y. 1956)   Cited 267 times
    Holding that the specific provision trumped the general provision, even in the absence of any inconsistency between those provisions

  8. McCoy v. Abigail Kirsch at Tappan Hill, Inc.

    99 A.D.3d 13 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)   Cited 29 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In McCoy v Abigail Kirsch at Tappan Hill, Inc. (99 AD3d at 16), the court found that dismantling a wedding canopy (after the wedding) was work on a "structure."

  9. People v. Illardo

    48 N.Y.2d 408 (N.Y. 1979)   Cited 90 times

    Argued October 10, 1979 Decided November 27, 1979 Appeal from the Erie County Court, JOSEPH P. McCARTHY, J. Paul J. Cambria, Jr., and Herald Price Fahringer for appellant. Edward C. Cosgrove, District Attorney (John De Frank and Judith Blake Manzella of counsel), for respondent. Robert Abrams, Attorney-General (Shirley Adelson Siegel and John J. Warner, Jr., of counsel), in his statutory capacity under section 71 of the Executive Law. FUCHSBERG, J. We uphold in this case the affirmative defense provisions

  10. 2619 Realty v. Fidelity Guar. Ins. Co.

    303 A.D.2d 299 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)   Cited 36 times

    2376 March 25, 2003. Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Jerry Crispino, J.), entered September 21, 2001, which denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and granted, in part, plaintiff's cross motion for summary judgment, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, plaintiff's cross motion denied, defendant's motion granted, and it is declared that defendant is not required to defend or indemnify plaintiff in the underlying action. The Clerk is directed to enter

  11. Section 500.1 - General requirements

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 500.1   Cited 1 times

    (a) All papers shall comply with applicable statutes and rules, particularly the signing requirement of section 130-1.1 -a of this Title. (b) Papers filed. Papers filed means briefs, papers submitted pursuant to sections 500.10 and 500.11 of this Part, motion papers, records and appendices. (c) Method of reproduction. All papers filed may be reproduced by any method that produces a permanent, legible, black image on white paper. Reproduction on both sides of the paper is encouraged. (d) Designation