After nine successful years, Bowitch & Coffey is closing its doors. Starting August 1, 2021, Gary Bowitch and Dan Coffey will be practicing law in their own law firms and will continue to provide clients with the same high quality legal services in their areas of expertise. Their new contact information is:
Gary S. Bowitch
Attorney at Law
13 Willow Street
Castleton, NY 12033
Phone: 518-527-2232
Email: gbowitch@bowitchlaw.com
Bowitch Law New Website
Daniel Coffey
Coffey Law PLLC
17 Elk Street
Albany, NY 12207
Phone: 518-813-9500
Email: Dan@coffeylawny.com
Coffey Law New Website
Court Allows Subrogation Action To Proceed Against A Municipality
In 1978, an auto parts store in the Village of Delhi, NY, hired a plumber to install a fire sprinkler system in his store. The plumber ran a pipe from his building but did not hook up to the Village water main. The Village connected this pipe to the water main and installed a shutoff valve in the main which was supposed to prevent water from entering the store. For whatever reason, the store never installed the sprinkler system.
One Court Allows Auto Fire Case to Proceed; Another Court Dismisses Fireplace Subro
Two short cases from New York to report on this month.
First: an appellate court here in Albany allowed an automobile fire case to proceed to trial even though the specific defect which caused the fire was unknown [1]. A used pick-up truck was destroyed by fire nine days after it was purchased. The dealer that sold it had changed the oil prior to delivery. No work had been done on the vehicle since it left the dealer. Both sides agreed that the fire originated in the area of the oil filter, most likely due to leakage from the filter. Neither side could, however, specify the precise defect that caused the leakage. The Court found that plaintiff subrogating carrier had presented proof sufficient to sustain their lawsuit. To sustain a subrogation action under a theory of breach of warranty, New York law only requires that the carrier show that the product was not fit for its ordinary purpose while being used in the customary manner. This can be shown by use of “circumstantial” evidence – even if the precise defect which caused the fire is not known.
Subrogation Mold Claim Is Dismissed
Linda and Eric Lerner suffered a flood in their basement and submitted a claim to their carrier. The carrier offered to send a vendor to address the water damage, but instead the Lerners opted to hire “Whistle Clean.” Whistle Clean removed standing water using a wet vacuum and mop. When the Lerner home was inspected by the carrier one week later, mold and mildew were discovered. An additional claim was made and paid for mold and mildew remediation.
