Claim of Quigley v. American Motor Sales Corp.
This text of 36 A.D.2d 668 (Claim of Quigley v. American Motor Sales Corp.) 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.
Opinion
Reynolds, 'Staley, Jr., Greenblott and Cooke, JJ., concur; Herlihy, P. J., concurs in the following memorandum: While there was a possibility in Matter of Post v. Tennessee Prods. & Chem. [669]*669Corp. (14 N Y 2d 796) of some work-connected reason (automobile trouble, confusing signs, et cetera), such a likelihood is not here present, even though, as in Post, the decedent was an outside worker and the automobile was work-connected. I would vote to reaffirm my dissent in Post (see 19 A D 2d 484-487) except for the Court of Appeals decision, which seems to require my affirmance.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
36 A.D.2d 668, 318 N.Y.S.2d 208, 1971 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4748, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/claim-of-quigley-v-american-motor-sales-corp-nyappdiv-1971.