Richfield Properties, Ltd. v. Galaxy Knitting Mills, Inc.
Opinion of the Court
—In an action for a judgment declaring that the defendants are required to indemnify the plaintiffs Richfield Properties, Ltd., and Stuart Goldstein, individually and as partners doing business as Consol Building Associates, for any damages awarded in an underlying negligence action entitled Montenegro v Rich-field Props., which was pending in Supreme Court, Kings County, under Index No. 45683/93, the plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jones, J.), dated November 9, 1998, as (a) granted the cross
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs.
The plaintiffs failed to rebut the evidence of the defendant CNA Insurance Company (hereinafter CNA) that the plaintiffs Richfield Properties, Ltd., and Stuart Goldstein, individually and as partners doing business as Consol Building Associates (hereinafter Consol), were not added to the liability insurance policy it issued to the^ defendant Galaxy Knitting Mills, Inc. (hereinafter Galaxy), and the court therefore properly granted summary judgment to CNA dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it (see, American Ref-Fuel Co. v Resource Recycling, 248 AD2d 420; Morrison-Knudsen Co. v Continental Cas. Co., 181 AD2d 500).
After finding that Galaxy had breached its lease by failing to procure liability insurance for the benefit of Consol, the court properly limited Consol’s damages to the costs of obtaining its own liability policy since such a policy was in effect at the time of the accident from which the underlying tort claim arises (see, Mavashev v Shalosh Realty, 233 AD2d 301; Wallen v Polo Grounds Bar & Grill N. Y., 198 AD2d 19). Sullivan, J. P., S. Miller, Friedmann and Schmidt, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.