Abraham v. Hermitage Ins., 47 A.D.3d 855 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2008). · Go Syfert
Search
Abraham v. Hermitage Ins., 47 A.D.3d 855 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2008). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
28 citation events (28 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: 720 Livonia Dev. LLC, No. 1-19-47797, 2023 WL 5421832 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. Aug. 22, 2023)
Treatment trajectory · 2008 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2008 2017 2026
How cited ↗
Cited for
At page 855 Applying res judicata to insurance law claims13 citing cases“under the doctrine of res judicata, a disposition on the merits bars litigation between the same parties, or those in privity with them, of a cause of action arising out of the same transaction or series of transactions as a cause of action that either was raised or could have been raised in the pr…”the opinion's own words at *855, quoted by 29 later opinions · 9 listed here
  • Clerico v. Pollack, 148 A.D.3d 769 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2017).published
    Co., 47 AD3d 855, 855 [2008]).
  • Pedote v. STP Assocs., LLC, 124 A.D.3d 856 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2015).published
    Co., 47 AD3d 855, 855 [2008]).
  • Harris v. City of New York, 121 A.D.3d 852 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2014).published
    Co., 47 AD3d 855, 855 [2008]; see Bayer v City of New York, 115 AD3d 897, 898 [2014]; Cox v Hubbard, 115 AD3d 783, 784 [2014]).
  • Valenti v. Clocktower Plaza Props., Ltd., 118 A.D.3d 776 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2014).published 2 cites
    Co., 47 AD3d 855, 855 [2008]).
  • Bayer v. City of New York, 115 A.D.3d 897 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2014).published 2 cites
    Co., 47 AD3d 855, 855 [2008]).
  • Cox v. Hubbard, 115 A.D.3d 783 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2014).published 2 cites
    Co., 47 AD3d 855, 855 [2008]; see Douglas Elliman, LLC v Bergere, 98 AD3d 642, 642-643 [2012]; Pondview Corp. v Blatt, 95 AD3d 980, 980 [2012]; Matter of ADC Contr. & Constr., Inc. v Town of Southampton, 50 AD3d 1025, 1026 [2008]).
  • Douglas Elliman, LLC v. Bergere, 98 A.D.3d 642 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2012).published 2 cites
    Co., 47 AD3d 855, 855 [2008]; see Pondview Corp. v Blatt, 95 AD3d 980, 980 [2012]; Matter of ADC Contr. & Constr., Inc. v Town of Southampton, 50 AD3d 1025, 1026 [2008]; see also Matter of Hunter, 4 NY3d 260, 269 [2005]; Union St.
  • Pondview Corp. v. Blatt, 95 A.D.3d 980 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2012).published
    Co., 47 AD3d 855, 855 [2008]; see Matter of Hunter, 4 NY3d 260, 269 [2005]; Grant v Aurora Loan Servs., 88 AD3d 949, 949 [2011]; Town of Huntington v Beechwood Carmen Bldg.
  • ADC Contracting & Constr., Inc. v. Town of Southampton, 50 A.D.3d 1025 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2008).published
    Co., 47 AD3d 855, 855 [2008]; see Matter of Hunter, 4 NY3d 260, 269 [2005]; Barbieri v Bridge Funding, 5 AD3d 414, 415 [2004]; Winkler v Weiss, 294 AD2d 428, 429 [2002]).
851 N.Y.S.2d at 609 cited at this page1 citing case
  • 720 Livonia Dev. LLC, No. 1-19-47797, 2023 WL 5421832 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. Aug. 22, 2023).
    Co., 47 A.D.3d 855, 855 , 851 N.Y.S.2d 608, 609 (2008); see O’Brien v. City of Syracuse, 54 N.Y.2d 353, 357 , 445 N.Y.S.2d 687 , 429 N.E.2d 1158, 1159 (1981) (“Once a claim is brought to a final conclusion, all other claims arising out of…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Tony Abraham
v.
Hermitage Insurance Company, and Eagle Insurance Company
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York.
Jan 29, 2008.
Published opinion
47 A.D.3d 855
Cited by 22 opinions  |  Published

In an action to enforce a judgment pursuant to Insurance Law § 3420, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kelly, J.), entered April 6, 2006, as, upon an order of the same court entered January 23, 2006, granting that branch of the motion of the defendant Eagle Insurance Company which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it, and denying that branch of his motion which was for summary judgment on the complaint insofar as asserted against that defendant, is in favor of the defendant Eagle Insurance Company and against him dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against that defendant.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Under the doctrine of res judicata, a disposition on the merits bars litigation between the same parties, or those in privity with them, of a cause of action arising out of the same transaction or series of transactions as a cause of action that either was raised or could have been raised in the prior proceeding (see Matter of Hunter, 4 NY3d 260, 269 [2005]; Barbieri v Bridge Funding, 5 AD3d 414, 415 [2004]; Winkler v Weiss, 294 AD2d 428, 429 [2002]). The fact that causes of action may be stated separately or invoke different legal theories, will not permit relitigation of claims (see Matter of Hodes v Axelrod, 70 NY2d 364, 372 [1987]).

[*856] Here, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the motion of the defendant Eagle Insurance Company (hereinafter Eagle) which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it on the ground of res judicata, as the plaintiff’s claims regarding whether there is coverage under the Eagle policy could have been raised in a prior action which was disposed of on the merits (see Sabatino v Capeo Trading, Inc., 27 AD3d 1019 [2006]; Barbieri v Bridge Funding, 5 AD3d at 415; CRK Contr. of Suffolk v Brown & Assoc., 260 AD2d 530 [1999]).

In light of the foregoing determination, the plaintiffs remaining contentions have been rendered academic. Spolzino, J.R., Ritter, Miller and Dickerson, JJ., concur.