Piscionere v. Bellino Bros. Construction Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Piscionere v. Bellino Bros. Construction Co.

10 A.D.2d 580, 195 N.Y.S.2d 767, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12171

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

DecidedJanuary 18, 1960

StatusPublished

This text of 10 A.D.2d 580 (Piscionere v. Bellino Bros. Construction Co.) 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

Piscionere v. Bellino Bros. Construction Co., 10 A.D.2d 580, 195 N.Y.S.2d 767, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12171 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for injuries to property caused by negligent blasting operations (2d cause of action) and to recover on a statutory bond, filed by defendant with the City of Yonkers, pursuant to an ordinance providing for the issuance of blasting permits (1st cause of action), the second cause of action was withdrawn at the trial, there being no proof of negligence, and the jury returned a verdict in favor of plaintiffs against defendant on the first cause of action. The appeal is from the judgment of the County Court, Westchester County, entered thereon. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. In Fleetash Fealty Co. v. Mount Vernon Contr. Corp. (5 A D 2d 687, affd. 5 N Y 2d 854) and Juliano v. Circle Constr. Corp. (276 App. Div. 1086) the third-party beneficiaries were endeavoring to recover on statutory bonds containing coverage broader than that required by the ordinance; to that extent the obligation in the bonds was not there available to a third party unless he gave consideration for the broader provision. There is no such situation here, where the provision invoked by respondents is in strict conformity with the requirements of the ordinance. Present — Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Ughetta and Kleinfeld, JJ.

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

In an action to recover damages for injuries to property caused by negligent blasting operations (2d cause of action) and to recover on a statutory bond, filed by defendant with the City of Yonkers, pursuant to an ordinance providing for the issuance of blasting permits (1st cause of action), the second cause of action was withdrawn at the trial, there being no proof of negligence, and the jury returned a verdict in favor of plaintiffs against defendant on the first cause of action. The appeal is from the judgment of the County Court, Westchester County, entered thereon. Judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. In Fleetash Fealty Co. v. Mount Vernon Contr. Corp. (5 A D 2d 687, affd. 5 N Y 2d 854) and Juliano v. Circle Constr. Corp. (276 App. Div. 1086) the third-party beneficiaries were endeavoring to recover on statutory bonds containing coverage broader than that required by the ordinance; to that extent the obligation in the bonds was not there available to a third party unless he gave consideration for the broader provision. There is no such situation here, where the provision invoked by respondents is in strict conformity with the requirements of the ordinance. Present — Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Ughetta and Kleinfeld, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 A.D.2d 580, 195 N.Y.S.2d 767, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12171, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/piscionere-v-bellino-bros-construction-co-nyappdiv-1960.