Garcia v. Reid

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Garcia v. Reid

134 A.D.2d 351, 520 N.Y.S.2d 828, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50529

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

DecidedNovember 9, 1987

StatusPublished

This text of 134 A.D.2d 351 (Garcia v. Reid) 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

Garcia v. Reid, 134 A.D.2d 351, 520 N.Y.S.2d 828, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50529 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Marlow, J.), dated February 21, 1985, which dismissed this matter "without prejudice to such further applications as petitioner may wish to make in the proper forum”.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, without costs or disbursements, the application is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, for further proceedings.

Since this suit against the individual respondents sounds in tort for damages arising out of an alleged breach of a duty owed individually by those respondents directly to the petitioner, the State is not the real party in interest even though it could be held secondarily liable for the tortious acts under the doctrine of respondeat superior. Thus, this matter can be maintained against the respondents in the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (see, Morell v Balasubramanian, 70 NY2d [352]*352297). Mangano, J. P., Brown, Lawrence, Weinstein and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Marlow, J.), dated February 21, 1985, which dismissed this matter "without prejudice to such further applications as petitioner may wish to make in the proper forum”.

Ordered that the judgment is reversed, without costs or disbursements, the application is reinstated, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, for further proceedings.

Since this suit against the individual respondents sounds in tort for damages arising out of an alleged breach of a duty owed individually by those respondents directly to the petitioner, the State is not the real party in interest even though it could be held secondarily liable for the tortious acts under the doctrine of respondeat superior. Thus, this matter can be maintained against the respondents in the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (see, Morell v Balasubramanian, 70 NY2d [352]*352297). Mangano, J. P., Brown, Lawrence, Weinstein and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

134 A.D.2d 351, 520 N.Y.S.2d 828, 1987 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 50529, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garcia-v-reid-nyappdiv-1987.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack