AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

Daniel Perez JUAREZ, Plaintiff, v. RYE DEPOT PLAZA, LLC, et al., Defendants. Rye Depot Plaza, LLC, et al., Third–Party Plaintiffs–Appellants,

Baxter Smith & Shapiro, P.C., White Plains (Sim R. Shapiro of counsel), for appellants.

Gorton & Gorton, LLP, Mineola (John T. Gorton of counsel), for respondent.

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Sharon A.M. Aarons, J.), entered April 1, 2015, which denied defendants/third-party plaintiffs' (Rye and Imajan) motion for summary judgment on their contractual indemnification claim against third-party defendant (GFX), unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Rye and Imajan failed to establish prima facie either that GFX executed the indemnification agreement before plaintiff's accident or that the agreement was intended to be retroactive (see Mikulski v. Adam R. West, Inc., 78 A.D.3d 910, 912 N.Y.S.2d 233 [2d Dept.2010] ). Neither Rye's principal nor GFX's principal recalled when the undated agreement was signed. Nor does the conclusory affidavit by the controller of Imajan's manager establish the date on which the agreement was signed. As to retroactivity, the agreement contains no “express words or necessary implication

[by which] it clearly appears to be the parties' intention to include past obligations” (see Mikulski, 78 A.D.3d at 911, 912 N.Y.S.2d 233 [internal quotation marks omitted] ).

FRIEDMAN, J.P., RENWICK, ANDRIAS, GISCHE, WEBBER, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Juarez v. Rye Depot Plaza, LLC
(Jun 7, 2016)