Case Name: Salvatore D'Angelis et al., Plaintiffs, v. Leonard Litwin et al., Doing Business as Arwin 74th Street Co., et al., Appellants, and Meyerbank Electric Co., Inc., Respondent; Leonard Litwin et al., Doing Business as Arwin 74th Street Co., et al., Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Acme-Ace Inc. et al., Third-Party Defendants-Respondents; Salvatore D'Angelis et al., Plaintiffs, v. Eisenberg Sons Carpentry, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent; Meyerbank Electric Co., Inc., Fourth-Party Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Acme-Ace Inc. et al., Fourth-Party Defendants-Respondents
Court: New York Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1982-05-20
Citations: 56 N.Y.2d 789
Docket Number: 
Parties: Salvatore D’Angelis et al., Plaintiffs, v Leonard Litwin et al., Doing Business as Arwin 74th Street Co., et al., Appellants, and Meyerbank Electric Co., Inc., Respondent. Leonard Litwin et al., Doing Business as Arwin 74th Street Co., et al., Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellants, v Acme-Ace Inc. et al., Third-Party Defendants-Respondents. Salvatore D’Angelis et al., Plaintiffs, v Eisenberg Sons Carpentry, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent. Meyerbank Electric Co., Inc., Fourth-Party Plaintiff-Respondent, v Acme-Ace Inc. et al., Fourth-Party Defendants-Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Reports
Volume: 56
Pages: 789–792

Head Matter:
Salvatore D’Angelis et al., Plaintiffs, v Leonard Litwin et al., Doing Business as Arwin 74th Street Co., et al., Appellants, and Meyerbank Electric Co., Inc., Respondent. Leonard Litwin et al., Doing Business as Arwin 74th Street Co., et al., Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellants, v Acme-Ace Inc. et al., Third-Party Defendants-Respondents. Salvatore D’Angelis et al., Plaintiffs, v Eisenberg Sons Carpentry, Inc., Third-Party Defendant-Respondent. Meyerbank Electric Co., Inc., Fourth-Party Plaintiff-Respondent, v Acme-Ace Inc. et al., Fourth-Party Defendants-Respondents.
Decided May 20, 1982
APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
William Claire and William H. Morris for appellants.
John T. Pellini and Stanford Kaplan for Meyerbank Electric Co., Inc., respondent.
Douglas A. Boeckmann for Eisenberg Sons Carpentry, Inc., respondent.
Langan & Levy for Die Underhill Construction Co., respondent.
Lester E. Fetell for Acme-Ace Inc., respondent.

Opinion:
OPINION OF THE COURT
On review of submissions pursuant to rule 500.2 (b) of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.2 [b]), order affirmed, with costs. The cross claims against defendant and fourth-party plaintiff Meyerbank Electric Co., Inc., were properly dismissed for failure of the appellants to establish a prima facie case. Furthermore, it cannot be said, as a matter of law, that the verdict in favor of third-party defendant Eisenberg Sons Carpentry, Inc., was so inconsistent as to require a reversal in favor of such third-party defendant or a new trial. Finally, we note that whether appellants might have been entitled to indemnification on the strength of the indemnity clauses contained in the subcontract agreements alone is not an issue preserved for our review.
Concur: Chief Judge Cooke and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Fuchsberg and Meyer. Taking no part: Judge Wachtler.