Colonial Surety Co. v. Genesee Valley Nurseries, Inc.
Cases that cite this one
7 later published cases cite this decision.
- G.M. Crisalli & Assoc., Inc. v. Prestige Contr., Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
- A&M GLOBAL MANAGEMENT CORP. v. NORTHTOWN UROLOGY ASSOCIATES, P.C. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- Carousel Ctr. Co., LP v. Kaufmann's Carousel, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2021)
- HealthNow N.Y., Inc. v. David Home Bldrs., Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
- THE WHARTON ASSOCIATES, INC. v. CONTINENTAL INDUSTRIAL CAPITAL LLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
- Wharton Associates, Inc. v. Continental Industrial Capital LLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
- Wharton Associates, Inc. v. Continental Industrial Capital LLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Allegany County (Thomas E Brown, A.J.), entered January 26, 2011. The order denied plaintiffs motion to amend a second amended judgment to include additional attorneys’ fees, interest and other costs.
It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from is unanimously modified on the law by vacating that part denying plaintiffs motion insofar as it sought to amend the second amended judgment to include additional attorneys’ fees that
Initially, we note that plaintiff has not presented any argument on appeal concerning that part of its motion seeking to increase the amount of damages awarded in the second amended judgment by adding certain postjudgment interest, and it therefore is deemed to have abandoned that issue (see Ciesinski v Town of Aurora, 202 AD2d 984, 984 [1994]).
“Under the general rule, attorney [s’] fees are incidents of litigation and a prevailing party may not collect them from the loser unless an award is authorized by agreement between the parties, statute or court rule” (Hooper Assoc. v AGS Computers, 74 NY2d 487, 491 [1989]). “[A] contract assuming th[e] obligation [to indemnify with respect to attorneys’ fees] must be strictly construed to avoid reading into it a duty [that] the parties did not intend to be assumed” (Tudisco v Duerr [appeal No. 2], 89 AD3d 1372, 1376 [2011] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Furthermore, a party may not recover attorneys’ fees arising from litigation with the other party to a contract unless an intent to provide for such reimbursement “is unmistakably clear from the language of the promise” (Hooper Assoc., 74 NY2d at 492; see Parkway Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine LLC v Vitullo, 72 AD3d 1513 [2010]).
Here, the pertinent part of the indemnification agreement
Plaintiffs remaining contention is academic in light of our determination. Present — Smith, J.R, Lindley, Sconiers and Martoche, JJ.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.