Gross v. Hanover Ins. Co.
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
138 F.R.D. 53 (1991)
- Written by Shelby Crawford, JD
Facts
Gross (plaintiff) filed an insurance claim with Hanover (defendant) for a large amount of jewelry that was stolen while on consignment at a retail jewelry store called 3-R Jewelers (3-R). Hanover made a motion to implead Anthony Rizzo (3-R’s owner) and Joseph Rizzo (a 3-R employee) as third party defendants. Hanover’s third party complaint alleged a negligence claim against Joseph, a conversion claim against Joseph, and a negligent hiring claim against Anthony. Hanover alleged that a witness reported seeing a man enter 3-R’s back room with a paper bag after speaking with Joseph on the night of the theft. Hanover also alleged Anthony knew Joseph had a cocaine problem while Joseph was employed at 3-R. Gross argued that Hanover’s motion to implead the Rizzos should be dismissed because Hanover’s third party claims were too speculative, Hanover waited too long to implead the Rizzos, and Gross would suffer prejudice if the motion was granted. The district court granted Hanover’s motion to implead the Rizzos.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Leisure, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
