May 19, 2026
London Fischer LLP congratulates Brian A. Kalman and his team on their victory in the case Schiff v. Intersystem S&S Corp., 247 A.D.3d 439 (1st Dep’t 2026). The Appellate Division, First Department reversed the trial court decision and held that contractor was obligated to name London Fischer LLP’s client as an additional insured on the contractor’s insurance policy. The First Department held:
On the merits, Apple Bank should have been awarded summary judgment on that cross-claim, as it sustained its prima facie burden by submitting the relevant contract requiring Intersystem to name "the Customer" as an additional insured (see Benedetto v Hyatt Corp., 203 AD3d 505, 506, 165 N.Y.S.3d 45 [1st Dept 2022]). Although the contract does not define "the Customer," the documentary and testimonial evidence that Apple Bank submitted in support of its motion — including the deposition testimony of Intersystem's principal indicating that "the Customer" referred to Apple Bank — established that Apple Bank was "the Customer" within the meaning of the contract. Intersystem did not submit any insurance policy naming Apple Bank as an additional insured and, thus, failed to raise an issue of fact in opposition (see id.).
To read a copy of the decision click on: Schiff v. Intersystem S&S Corp., 247 A.D.3d 439 (1st Dep’t 2026).
