Lucas v. St. Johns-Ralph Service Center, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lucas v. St. Johns-Ralph Service Center, Inc.

26 A.D.2d 646, 272 N.Y.S.2d 409, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3695

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

DecidedJuly 5, 1966

StatusPublished

This text of 26 A.D.2d 646 (Lucas v. St. Johns-Ralph Service Center, Inc.) 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

Lucas v. St. Johns-Ralph Service Center, Inc., 26 A.D.2d 646, 272 N.Y.S.2d 409, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3695 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries arising from an automobile accident, the defendant automobile owner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered February 7, 1966, which denied his motion to serve an amended answer alleging a cross claim for indemnity against his codefendants, a service station and its employee, the driver of the automobile. Order'reversed, without costs, and motion granted. The proposed answer printed in the record on appeal shall be deemed to be the amended answer; and the codefendants’ time to answer with respect to the cross claim is extended until 20 days after entry of the order hereon. In our opinion, under all the circumstances, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny leave to the owner to serve an amended answer alleging a cross claim against the service station that had possession of the vehicle and its employee who drove the vehicle at the time of the accident (CPLR 3025; Traub v. Dinzler, 309 N. Y. 395). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

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

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries arising from an automobile accident, the defendant automobile owner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered February 7, 1966, which denied his motion to serve an amended answer alleging a cross claim for indemnity against his codefendants, a service station and its employee, the driver of the automobile. Order'reversed, without costs, and motion granted. The proposed answer printed in the record on appeal shall be deemed to be the amended answer; and the codefendants’ time to answer with respect to the cross claim is extended until 20 days after entry of the order hereon. In our opinion, under all the circumstances, it was an improvident exercise of discretion to deny leave to the owner to serve an amended answer alleging a cross claim against the service station that had possession of the vehicle and its employee who drove the vehicle at the time of the accident (CPLR 3025; Traub v. Dinzler, 309 N. Y. 395). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 A.D.2d 646, 272 N.Y.S.2d 409, 1966 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3695, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lucas-v-st-johns-ralph-service-center-inc-nyappdiv-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack