1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.J.
  4. 81 N.J.
  5. 81 N.J. 514 (1980)
 

HARTFORD FIRE INS. CO. v. RIEFOLO CONSTR. CO.

81 N.J. 514 (1980)

410 A.2d 658

THE HARTFORD FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. RIEFOLO CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.; THE CONDITIONING CO., INC.; FLUORO ELECTRIC CORPORATION; ELIZABETH IRON WORKS, INC.; GROVE PLUMBING & HEATING CO.; THE HOME INDEMNITY CO.; EMPLOYERS COMMERCIAL UNION INSURANCE CO.; THE MARYLAND CASUALTY CO.; AND THE AMERICAN INSURANCE CO., DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS, AND THE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE VOCATIONAL SCHOOLS IN THE COUNTY OF ESSEX AND UNITED STATES FIDELITY & GUARANTY CO., DEFENDANTS, AND SENTRY INSURANCE, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Decided January 17, 1980.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mr. Robert C. Gruhin argued the cause for appellant Riefolo Construction Co.

Mr. Arnold L. Simon argued the cause for appellants The Conditioning Co., Inc. and Employers Commercial Union Insurance Co.

Mr. Barry Blum argued the cause for appellant The Maryland Casualty Company (Messrs. Press & Blum, attorneys).

Mr. Allan Maitlin argued the cause for appellants Elizabeth Iron Works, Inc. and Grove Plumbing & Heating Co. (Messrs. Feuerstein, Sachs & Maitlin, attorneys).

Mr. Ernest Prupis argued the cause for appellant The American Insurance Co. (Messrs. Weltchek, Prupis and Ritz, attorneys).

Mr. Charles H. Hoens argued the cause for respondent The Hartford Fire Insurance Co. (Messrs. Lum, Biunno and Tompkins attorneys; Mr. Hoens, of counsel; Mr. David C. Dreifuss on the brief).

Mr. John J. Ronca argued the cause for respondent Sentry Insurance (Messrs. Ronca and McDonald, attorneys).

The opinion of the court was delivered by PASHMAN, J.

This case involves questions of contract interpretation arising from a fire at a public construction project. Preliminarily, we consider the right of plaintiff insurance company to sue in subrogation on its insured's contract claims. Finding that such a suit may be maintained, we next determine which of the parties to the construction contracts should bear the risk of loss...

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