Kile v. Riefler Bros. Contractors
This text of 282 A.D. 1000 (Kile v. Riefler Bros. Contractors) 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
Order insofar as appealed from reversed on the law and facts, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion to dismiss the third-party complaint granted, with $10 costs. Memorandum: We interpret the third-party complaint as a complete disavowal of negligence on the part of the defendant and third-party plaintiff, thus eliminating any possible premise upon which the original plaintiff could obtain a judgment against the third-party plaintiff. A valid basis for a judgment against the third-party plaintiff is an essential condition to sustain a claim over under section 193-a of the Civil Practice Act. (Cloud v. Martin, 273 App. Div. 769; Wolf v. La Rosa & Sons, 298 N. V. 597.) Moreover, as the original complaint does not charge the third-party plaintiff with liability by operation of law for a wrongful act committed by another, but, on the contrary, charges this party with active negligence of its own, it necessarily follows that the third-party plaintiff and the third-party defendant must be regarded as joint tort-feasors in pari delicto. (Fox v. Western New York Motor Lines, 257 N. Y. 305; Middleton v. City of New York, 276 App. Div. 780, affid. 300 N. Y. 732; Seider v. Kline, 279 App. Div. 1130; Sannit v. Buffalo Wire Works, 278 App. Div. 632, affd. 302 N. Y. 820.) The alleged indemnity agreement does not in unequivocal terms purport to indemnify the third-party plaintiff against its own negligence and, therefore, is not available to support the third-party complaint. (Thompson-Starrett Go. v. Otis Elevator Co., 273 N. Y. 36, 41; Walters v. Rao Elec. Equipment* Co., 289 N. Y. 57; Semanchuck V. Fifth Ave. & 37th St. Corp., 290 N. Y. 412.) All concur. (Appeal from part of an order denying a motion by the third-party defendant to dismiss the third-party complaint in an action for damages for the death of plaintiff’s intestate.) Present — MeCurn, P. J., Vaughan, Kimball, Piper and Wheeler, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
282 A.D. 1000, 125 N.Y.S.2d 680, 1953 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5652, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kile-v-riefler-bros-contractors-nyappdiv-1953.