Parsons v. Pappas

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Parsons v. Pappas

41 A.D.2d 897, 342 N.Y.S.2d 840, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4743

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

DecidedApril 13, 1973

StatusPublished

This text of 41 A.D.2d 897 (Parsons v. Pappas) 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

Parsons v. Pappas, 41 A.D.2d 897, 342 N.Y.S.2d 840, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4743 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: While the question of the defendants’ negligence was one of fact and properly passed upon by the jury, this may well be a case for application of the rule of apportionment between joint tort-feasors as stated in Dole v. Dow Chem. Co. (30 N Y 2d 143) and Kelly v. Long Is. Light. Co. (31 N Y 2d 25) which rule was enunciated during the course of this trial. If the defendants so stipulate, that determination may be made by a Trial Judge on the basis of the record as it now stands. If they do not so stipulate, it may be the subject of another action. (Stein v. Whitehead, 40 A D 2d 89, 93.) (Appeal from judgment of Steuben Trial Term in automobile negligence action.) Present — Goldman, P. J., Witmer, Moule, Simons and Henry, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: While the question of the defendants’ negligence was one of fact and properly passed upon by the jury, this may well be a case for application of the rule of apportionment between joint tort-feasors as stated in Dole v. Dow Chem. Co. (30 N Y 2d 143) and Kelly v. Long Is. Light. Co. (31 N Y 2d 25) which rule was enunciated during the course of this trial. If the defendants so stipulate, that determination may be made by a Trial Judge on the basis of the record as it now stands. If they do not so stipulate, it may be the subject of another action. (Stein v. Whitehead, 40 A D 2d 89, 93.) (Appeal from judgment of Steuben Trial Term in automobile negligence action.) Present — Goldman, P. J., Witmer, Moule, Simons and Henry, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

41 A.D.2d 897, 342 N.Y.S.2d 840, 1973 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4743, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parsons-v-pappas-nyappdiv-1973.