Jarvis & Spitz, Inc. v. Michael Federation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jarvis & Spitz, Inc. v. Michael Federation

14 A.D.2d 833, 220 N.Y.S.2d 680

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

DecidedOctober 26, 1961

StatusPublished

This text of 14 A.D.2d 833 (Jarvis & Spitz, Inc. v. Michael Federation) 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

Jarvis & Spitz, Inc. v. Michael Federation, 14 A.D.2d 833, 220 N.Y.S.2d 680 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

Memorandum: The contract between the parties was oral and provided simply for welding joints at a fixed price per weld and did not provide for furnishing protection during the process of welding. The defendant was not under a duty to protect the work, either as a matter of contract law or tort law. Therefore, there could not be a violation of duty by the defendant. The findings of the trial court to the contrary are disapproved and reversed. No question of third-party indemnity was involved herein. Findings upon that subject are also disapproved and reversed. (Appeal from judgment of Monroe Equity Term dismissing plaintiff’s complaint on the merits, in an action for damages alleged to have been sustained by reason of negligence and breach of contract in construction work.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Halpern and McClusky, JJ.

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

Memorandum: The contract between the parties was oral and provided simply for welding joints at a fixed price per weld and did not provide for furnishing protection during the process of welding. The defendant was not under a duty to protect the work, either as a matter of contract law or tort law. Therefore, there could not be a violation of duty by the defendant. The findings of the trial court to the contrary are disapproved and reversed. No question of third-party indemnity was involved herein. Findings upon that subject are also disapproved and reversed. (Appeal from judgment of Monroe Equity Term dismissing plaintiff’s complaint on the merits, in an action for damages alleged to have been sustained by reason of negligence and breach of contract in construction work.) Present — Williams, P. J., Bastow, Goldman, Halpern and McClusky, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

14 A.D.2d 833, 220 N.Y.S.2d 680, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jarvis-spitz-inc-v-michael-federation-nyappdiv-1961.