Cnty. of Westchester v. Welton Becket Assocs., 485 N.E.2d 1029 (NY 1985). · Go Syfert
Cnty. of Westchester v. Welton Becket Assocs., 485 N.E.2d 1029 (NY 1985). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
97 citation events (17 in the last 25 years) across 8 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Guy v. The Automobile Insurance Company of Hartford, Connecticut (nyed, 2020-01-22)
Treatment trajectory · 1985 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1985 2005 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Guy v. The Automobile Insurance Company of Hartford, Connecticut (2×)
E.D.N.Y · 2020 · signal: see · confidence high
See Westchester Cty. v. Welton Becket Assocs., 102 A.D.2d 34, 46 (2d Dep’t 1984), aff'd, 66 N.Y.2d 642 , 485 N.E.2d 1029 (N.Y.
discussed Cited "see" Arsenault v. Arsenault
N.Y. App. Div. · 1993 · signal: see · confidence high
Thus, in the absence of a showing that respondent would be prejudiced thereby, the court did not abuse its discretion in permitting petitioner to discontinue the proceeding without prejudice (CPLR 3217 [b]; see, Mahaffey v Mahaffey, 52 AD2d 1039; see generally, County of Westchester v Becket Assocs., 102 AD2d 34, 49 , affd 66 NY2d 642 ; Valladares v Valladares, 80 AD2d 244, 258 , affd 55 NY2d 388 ).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Rosenbach v. Diversified Group, Inc.
N.Y. App. Div. · 2011 · signal: see also · confidence low
Indeed, the Court of Appeals has expressly recognized that contribution applies among tortfeasors “in pari delicto” (Mas v Two Bridges Assoc., 75 NY2d 680, 689-690 [1990]; see also County of Westchester v Welton Becket Assoc., 102 AD2d 34, 46 [1984], affd 66 NY2d 642 [1985] [“Contribution involves an apportionment of responsibility where wrongdoers are in pari delicto' ']).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Fandy Corp. v. Lung-Fong Chen
N.Y. App. Div. · 1999 · signal: see also · confidence low
Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the issue of whether the plaintiff had the right to rely upon representations made to it by its attorney, the defendant herein, without further investigation (see, Smith v Smith, 134 NY 62, 65-66 ; Todd v Pearl Woods, Inc., 20 AD2d 911 , affd 15 NY2d 817 ; see also, County of Westchester v Becket Assocs., 102 AD2d 34, 50-51 , affd 66 NY2d 642 ) was not necessarily decided in a prior foreclosure action entitled Yen-Te Hsueh Chen v Geranium Dev.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Neil Plumbing & Heating Construction Corp. v. Providence Washington Insurance
N.Y. App. Div. · 1986 · signal: see also · confidence low
However, under fundamental principles of agency law, a principal may be held vicariously liable for the negligent acts of its agent committed in the course of the employment (Brown v Poritzky, 30 NY2d 289, 292 ), and a principal that is vicariously cast in damages as the result of its agent’s negligence may be entitled to full indemnification from the agent, who was the actual wrongdoer (Brown v Poritzky, supra, at p 292 ; see also, County of Westchester v Becket Assoc., 102 AD2d 34, 47 , affd 66 NY2d 642 ).
examined Cited "see, e.g." Barrett v. United States (3×)
S.D.N.Y. · 1986 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Westchester County v. Welton Becket Assoc., 102 A.D.2d 34 , 478 N.Y.S.2d 305, 315 (2d Dep’t 1985), aff'd, 66 N.Y.2d 642 , 495 N.Y.S.2d 364 , 485 N.E.2d 1029 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
County of Westchester
v.
Welton Becket Associates, , (And Third- and Fourth-Party Actions.) (Action No. 1.) J. R. Stevenson Corp. v. County of Westchester, , (And Third-, Fourth- and Fifth-Party Actions.) Welton Becket Associates, Sixth-Party v. Home Indemnity Company, Sixth-Party (Action No. 2.) (And Two Other Actions.)
New York Court of Appeals.
Oct 10, 1985.
485 N.E.2d 1029
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL, Kalvin Kamien, Julius L. Schapira and David A. Trager for J. R Stevenson Corp. and others, appellants., Harold H Wolgel and Michael H. Goldstein for Home Indemnity Company, appellant., Robert N. Fass, John R. Casolaro, James Gadsden and Jack Kaplan for Welton Becket Associates and others, respondents.
Cited by 75 opinions  |  Published

OPINION OF THE COURT

Order affirmed, with costs, for reasons stated in the opinion by Justice William C. Thompson at the Appellate Division (102 AD2d 34). Question certified answered in the affirmative.

Concur: Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Simons, Kaye, Alexander and Titone.