Linker v. Jamison

173 A.D. 349, 159 N.Y.S. 469, 1916 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6607
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 9, 1916
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 173 A.D. 349 (Linker v. Jamison) 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
Linker v. Jamison, 173 A.D. 349, 159 N.Y.S. 469, 1916 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6607 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1916).

Opinion

Carr, J.:

This is an action to recover damages for the death of plain - tiff’s decedent through the alleged negligence of the defendants. The defendants set up a general release made by the decedent after the accident and before his death. The plaintiff served no reply, and the defendants made no application to the court to compel the service of a reply. As the case stood when the trial was reached the plaintiff might meet the defense of a general release by traverse or avoidance as the case requires.” (Code [350]*350Civ. Proc. § 522.) In other words, she could offer evidence to avoid the release on equitable grounds. (Davis Confectionery Co., Inc., v. Rochester G. Ins. Co., 141 App. Div. 909; Mandeville v. Reynolds, 68 N. Y. 528; Arthur v. Homestead Fire Ins. Co., 78 id. 462; Keeler v. Keeler, 102 id. 30.) The defendants moved for a separate trial of the issue as to the general release. The motion was denied and the defendants appeal. This court has repeatedly declared the policy that under such circumstances, where the plaintiff seeks to avoid a general release pleaded by the defendant, the court at Special Term should direct a separate trial of the issues as to the general release. (Warner v. Star Co., 162 App. Div. 458; Arbutina v. Pittsburg Contracting Co., 168 id. 280; Piuntkosky v. Harrington’s Sons Co., 167 id. 117.)

The order of the Special Term should be reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and the motion of the defendants should be granted, without costs.

Jerks, P. J., Thomas, Mills and Rich, JJ., concurred.

Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and defendants’ motion granted, without costs.

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

Related

Langone v. Gaetjens, Berger & Wirth, Inc.
248 A.D. 591 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1936)
Hoad v. New York Cent. R.
3 F. Supp. 1020 (W.D. New York, 1933)
Baumeister v. James McCreery & Co.
207 A.D. 854 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1923)
Carmosin v. New York Consolidated Railroad
198 A.D. 810 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1921)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
173 A.D. 349, 159 N.Y.S. 469, 1916 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6607, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/linker-v-jamison-nyappdiv-1916.