Bell v. U Haul Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bell v. U Haul Co.

43 A.D.2d 980, 352 N.Y.S.2d 663, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5628

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedFebruary 25, 1974

StatusPublished

This text of 43 A.D.2d 980 (Bell v. U Haul Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bell v. U Haul Co., 43 A.D.2d 980, 352 N.Y.S.2d 663, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5628 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, defendants and third-party plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered February 9, 1973, as granted the branch of a motion by the infant third-party defendant, Wayne Henderson, that sought dismissal- of the third-party complaint as to him. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, without costs, and said branch of the motion denied. It was error to dismiss the third-party complaint as against the infant third-party defendant pursuant to CPLR 3211 (subd. [a], par. 7). As a pleading it states a cause of action (see Foley v. D>Agostmo, 21 A D 2d 60) . Special [981]*981Term should-not have looked behind the allegations of the pleading to resolve factual issues of causation, negligence and contributory negligence. Shapiro, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan and Munder, JJ., concur; Benjamin, J., dissents and votes to affirm.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, defendants and third-party plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered February 9, 1973, as granted the branch of a motion by the infant third-party defendant, Wayne Henderson, that sought dismissal- of the third-party complaint as to him. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, without costs, and said branch of the motion denied. It was error to dismiss the third-party complaint as against the infant third-party defendant pursuant to CPLR 3211 (subd. [a], par. 7). As a pleading it states a cause of action (see Foley v. D>Agostmo, 21 A D 2d 60) . Special [981]*981Term should-not have looked behind the allegations of the pleading to resolve factual issues of causation, negligence and contributory negligence. Shapiro, Acting P. J., Christ, Brennan and Munder, JJ., concur; Benjamin, J., dissents and votes to affirm.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

43 A.D.2d 980, 352 N.Y.S.2d 663, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5628, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bell-v-u-haul-co-nyappdiv-1974.