You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Aabco Sheet Metal Co. v. International Fidelity Insurance

Citations: 266 A.D.2d 23; 697 N.Y.S.2d 622; 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11159

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; November 3, 1999; New York; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Judgment was entered by the Supreme Court, New York County, on February 4, 1998, affirming the decision that International Fidelity Insurance Company (IFIC) is entitled to recover $66,810.76 from Morton Salkind. The court granted summary judgment to IFIC on its third-party complaint, establishing that IFIC was not negligent in describing the work covered by the payment bond issued to Salkind and Dial Mechanical Corporation, whose president reviewed and signed the bond. As a result, IFIC was entitled to recover expenses and attorneys’ fees incurred in defending against the action brought by plaintiff Aabco, based on the indemnity agreement with Salkind. This agreement mandated Salkind's reimbursement of IFIC's defense costs, regardless of whether the construction project associated with Aabco’s claim was covered by the bond. The decision was unanimous, with costs awarded to IFIC.

Legal Issues Addressed

Costs Awarded to Prevailing Party

Application: The court awarded costs to IFIC as the prevailing party in the litigation, affirming the entitlement to recover under the indemnity agreement.

Reasoning: The decision was unanimous, with costs awarded to IFIC.

Entitlement to Recovery under Indemnity Agreement

Application: The court ruled that International Fidelity Insurance Company (IFIC) was entitled to recover expenses and attorneys’ fees from Morton Salkind based on the indemnity agreement, which required reimbursement of defense costs.

Reasoning: As a result, IFIC was entitled to recover expenses and attorneys’ fees incurred in defending against the action brought by plaintiff Aabco, based on the indemnity agreement with Salkind.

Summary Judgment on Third-Party Complaint

Application: Summary judgment was granted to IFIC on its third-party complaint, confirming that there was no negligence in the description of work covered by the payment bond.

Reasoning: The court granted summary judgment to IFIC on its third-party complaint, establishing that IFIC was not negligent in describing the work covered by the payment bond issued to Salkind and Dial Mechanical Corporation.