Case Name: N. & E. Greenberg's Sons, Inc., Respondent, v. Peter Pan Fur Co., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1961-04-20
Citations: 33 Misc. 2d 453
Docket Number: 
Parties: N. & E. Greenberg’s Sons, Inc., Respondent, v. Peter Pan Fur Co., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 33
Pages: 453–454

Head Matter:
N. & E. Greenberg’s Sons, Inc., Respondent, v. Peter Pan Fur Co., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent.
Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,
April 20, 1961.
Joseph J. Einhorn and Patricia 8. Teitel for appellant. Marvin E. Kramer and Ronald Podolsky for defendant and third-party plaintiff-respondent.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
While a defendant in a negligence action may implead its insurance broker who allegedly breached his agreement to provide full insurance coverage, it was error for the trial court to deny the third-party defendant's motion to sever the main and third-party actions, as the third-party defendant would be subjected to some prejudice if both actions were tried together before the same jury (Thornton v. City of New York, 20 Misc 2d 838; Kelly v. Yannotti, 4 N Y 2d 603).
The order should he reversed, with $10 costs and the motion granted.
Concur — Hecht, J. P., Hoestadter and Gold, JJ.
Order reversed, etc.