In Admiral Indem. Co. v. Popular Plumbing & Heating Corp., 127 AD3d 419, 7 N.Y.S.3d 78 (1st Dept 2015), the plaintiff sued for property damages allegedly caused by a sprinkler system that had been improperly repaired by the defendant/third-party plaintiff, Popular Plumbing and Heating Corp. Popular impleaded Yeung Contracting LLC, the general contractor which hired Popular to perform the repairs. The First Department determined that the trial court properly exercised its discretion in severing the third-party action because Popular impleaded Yeung more than one month after the note of issue was filed in the main action, provided no reasonable justification for its delay, and was aware of Yeung's role in the project from the outset of the main action. There was substantial outstanding discovery in the third-party action while the main action was trial ready, and "although the main action and the third-party action are based on the same nucleus of facts, they involve disparate issues of law.... there is no possibility of inconsistent verdicts since Yeung's liability for common-law indemnification and contribution in the third-party action is contingent upon a finding that Popular is liable in the main action." (Id. at 419.)