Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Schultz v. Harrison Radiator Division, General Motors Corp.
Citations: 209 A.D.2d 956; 619 N.Y.S.2d 1017; 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11957
Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; November 15, 1994; New York; State Appellate Court
Order affirmed with costs. The Supreme Court granted summary judgment to third-party plaintiff Harrison Radiator Division of General Motors Corporation on common-law and contractual indemnification issues. Third-party defendant Commercial Painting Company failed to present a genuine issue of fact regarding Harrison's right to indemnification. It was established that Harrison did not supervise, control, or have authority over Commercial's work, qualifying Harrison for common-law indemnification. Additionally, since Commercial had exclusive authority over the work and no fault was attributed to Harrison, the indemnification clause in their contract is enforceable. The appeal was from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County, presided by Justice Whelan, with Justices Denman, Green, Fallon, Callahan, and Boehm in agreement.