New York Telephone Co. v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

New York Telephone Co. v. City of New York

99 A.D.2d 691, 471 N.Y.S.2d 594, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17025

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

DecidedFebruary 2, 1984

StatusPublished

This text of 99 A.D.2d 691 (New York Telephone Co. v. City of New York) 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

New York Telephone Co. v. City of New York, 99 A.D.2d 691, 471 N.Y.S.2d 594, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17025 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Sinclair, J.), entered June 15, 1982, which, inter alia, adjudged that the award in favor of plaintiff New York Telephone Company be reduced by 35% in accordance with the verdict, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, and a new trial ordered solely on the issue of said plaintiff’s comparative negligence, and, except as thus modified, affirmed, without costs or disbursements, unless the parties stipulate to amend the judgment to reflect a comparative negligence factor of 12% on New York Telephone Company’s part and to the entry of an amended judgment reflecting such percentage, in which case the judgment, as so amended and increased, is affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Sinclair, J.), entered February 18,1982, denying plaintiff New York Telephone Company’s motion to set aside the jury’s finding of 35% culpable negligence on said plaintiff’s part dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as subsumed. Review of this record leads us ineluctably to the conclusion that the pro rata share of the negligence of plaintiff New York Telephone Company, the lessee of certain polyvinyl chloride ducts, cannot exceed that of Empire City Subway Co., its wholly owned subsidiary, which installed the ducts in close proximity to a steam main. Concur — Kupferman, J. P., Sullivan, Ross, Carro and Milonas, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Sinclair, J.), entered June 15, 1982, which, inter alia, adjudged that the award in favor of plaintiff New York Telephone Company be reduced by 35% in accordance with the verdict, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, and a new trial ordered solely on the issue of said plaintiff’s comparative negligence, and, except as thus modified, affirmed, without costs or disbursements, unless the parties stipulate to amend the judgment to reflect a comparative negligence factor of 12% on New York Telephone Company’s part and to the entry of an amended judgment reflecting such percentage, in which case the judgment, as so amended and increased, is affirmed, without costs or disbursements. Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Sinclair, J.), entered February 18,1982, denying plaintiff New York Telephone Company’s motion to set aside the jury’s finding of 35% culpable negligence on said plaintiff’s part dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as subsumed. Review of this record leads us ineluctably to the conclusion that the pro rata share of the negligence of plaintiff New York Telephone Company, the lessee of certain polyvinyl chloride ducts, cannot exceed that of Empire City Subway Co., its wholly owned subsidiary, which installed the ducts in close proximity to a steam main. Concur — Kupferman, J. P., Sullivan, Ross, Carro and Milonas, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

99 A.D.2d 691, 471 N.Y.S.2d 594, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17025, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/new-york-telephone-co-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1984.