As to the issue of defendant's obligation to defend the underlying action, we affirm for the reasons stated by the IAS court. As to allocation of defense costs, we note that, as conceded by defendant at oral argument, the within policies provided successive, rather than concurrent, coverage to the insureds, and each insurer is therefore responsible for an equal share of defense costs (cf., North Riv. Ins. Co. v United Natl. Ins. Co.,
Let's get started
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.
