Case ID: ad3d_131/html/1005-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Friedlander Organization, LLC, Respondent, v Liberty Insurance Underwriters, Inc., Appellant. (Action No. 1.) Liberty Insurance Underwriters, Inc., Appellant, v Akin Ayorinde et al., Defendants, and Friedlander Organization, LLC, Respondent. (Action No. 2.)
    [16 NYS3d 467]
   In an action pursuant to Insurance Law § 3420 (a) (2) to recover the amount of an unsatisfied judgment against parties insured by Liberty Insurance Underwriters, Inc. (Action No. 1), and a related action, inter alia, to rescind a professional liability insurance policy (Action No. 2), Liberty Insurance Underwriters, Inc., appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Bucaria, J.), dated February 6, 2014, as denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint in Action No. 1 and on its first three causes of action in Action No. 2, and granted the cross motion of Friedlander Organization, LLC, to compel it to produce an additional witness for a deposition.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The appellant, Liberty Insurance Underwriters, Inc. (hereinafter Liberty), failed to establish its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the complaint in Action No. 1 and on its first three causes of action in Action No. 2. Accordingly, its motion for that relief was properly denied regardless of the sufficiency of the respondent’s opposition papers (see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]).

Contrary to Liberty’s contention, the Supreme Court properly granted the respondent’s cross motion to compel it to produce an additional witness for a deposition.

Mastro, J.P., Balkin, Chambers and Maltese, JJ., concur.