AVERY v. ARTHUR E. ARMITAGE AGENCY


242 N.J. Super. 293 (1990)

576 A.2d 907

RICHARD E. AVERY AND DONNA L. AVERY, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. ARTHUR E. ARMITAGE AGENCY, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, AND AETNA CASUALTY & SURETY COMPANY, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. JOANNE NEWELL AND BEVERLY NEWELL, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS CROSS-APPELLANTS, v. THE OHIO CASUALTY INSURANCE CO., DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT, AND THE BROWN AGENCY, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. DOROTHY E. BOCK, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT, AND STOCKWELL KNIGHT COMPANY, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Decided June 27, 1990.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Michael O. Kassak argued the cause for the appellants, Arthur E. Armitage Agency, The Brown Agency and Stockwell Knight Company (White and Williams, attorneys; Michael O. Kassak, and Ralph P. Catalano on the briefs).

Vincent J. Ciecka argued the cause for the respondents, Richard E. and Donna L. Avery (Michael Rakoski, on the brief).

William M. Honan argued the cause for the respondent Aetna Casualty & Surety Company (Horn, Kaplan, Goldberg, Gorny & Daniels, attorneys; William M. Honan, of counsel; Nicholas L. Paone and William M. Honan, on the brief).

Salvatore Alessi argued the cause for the respondent, The Ohio Casualty Insurance Company (Fratto, Alessi & Abbott, attorneys; John A. Fratto, on the brief).

John F. Kearney, III argued the cause for the respondents, cross-appellants, Joanne and Beverly Newell.

Michael Rakoski argued the cause for the respondent, Dorothy E. Bock (Vincent J. Ciecka, attorney; Michael Rakoski, on the brief).

Christine M. Cote argued the cause for the respondent, Hartford Insurance Company (Cooper, Perskie, April, Niedelman, Wagenheim and Levenson, attorneys; Barry D. Cohen, of counsel, Christine M. Cote, on the brief).

Before Judges SHEBELL, BAIME and KEEFE.


The opinion of the court was delivered by KEEFE, J.A.D.

Leave to appeal was granted to the defendant insurance brokers in these three unrelated cases involving common questions of law after partial summary judgment was granted in favor of the plaintiffs in each case against the insurance brokers, while at the same time dismissing the brokers' claims for indemnity against the defendant insurance companies. The common...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases