Lukoff v. Julella Cab Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lukoff v. Julella Cab Corp.

179 A.D.2d 429

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

DecidedJanuary 14, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 179 A.D.2d 429 (Lukoff v. Julella Cab Corp.) 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

Lukoff v. Julella Cab Corp., 179 A.D.2d 429 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

In this action to recover damages for personal injuries to a passenger in a taxicab and for loss of consortium, there are factual issues presented regarding the nature of the ownership and control of both defendant Midland Service Company and Midland Operating Company, currently a non-party, which cannot be resolved on the present record. Among other factors, the contradictory statements of defendant Sherman at his deposition in a related action and in his affidavit in support of defendants-appellants’ motion leave unanswered questions, which plaintiffs should be permitted to pursue in the course of their already noticed discovery in this action. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Rosenberger, Kupferman and Rubin, JJ.

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

In this action to recover damages for personal injuries to a passenger in a taxicab and for loss of consortium, there are factual issues presented regarding the nature of the ownership and control of both defendant Midland Service Company and Midland Operating Company, currently a non-party, which cannot be resolved on the present record. Among other factors, the contradictory statements of defendant Sherman at his deposition in a related action and in his affidavit in support of defendants-appellants’ motion leave unanswered questions, which plaintiffs should be permitted to pursue in the course of their already noticed discovery in this action. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Rosenberger, Kupferman and Rubin, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

179 A.D.2d 429, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lukoff-v-julella-cab-corp-nyappdiv-1992.