Ripley v. Pettus

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ripley v. Pettus

48 A.D.2d 638, 368 N.Y.S.2d 22, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9626

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

DecidedMay 22, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 48 A.D.2d 638 (Ripley v. Pettus) 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

Ripley v. Pettus, 48 A.D.2d 638, 368 N.Y.S.2d 22, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9626 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered on August 9, 1974, denying defendant’s motion to vacate the service of the summons and complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, the motion granted, and the service of the summons and complaint vacated. Appellant shall recover of respondents $40 costs and disbursements of this appeal. The defendant, Wayne Pettus (Pettus), is not a resident of New York State. He was, at the time of the occurrence sued upon, an employee of Atlantic Moving & Storage Company (Atlantic), a foreign corporation. The accident giving rise to this action occurred when one David Parton (Parton) was driving the truck of Atlantic. Construing the facts most favorably to the [639]*639plaintiff, Pettus and Parten were at best coemployees and we can envision no principal-agent relationship between them. Under these circumstances, there is no authority for service of a summons and complaint upon Pettus pursuant to section 253 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law (cf. De Concilius v Fry Roofing Co., 34 Misc 2d 430). Concur—Stevens, P. J., Markewich, Tilzer, Lane and Yesawich, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered on August 9, 1974, denying defendant’s motion to vacate the service of the summons and complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, the motion granted, and the service of the summons and complaint vacated. Appellant shall recover of respondents $40 costs and disbursements of this appeal. The defendant, Wayne Pettus (Pettus), is not a resident of New York State. He was, at the time of the occurrence sued upon, an employee of Atlantic Moving & Storage Company (Atlantic), a foreign corporation. The accident giving rise to this action occurred when one David Parton (Parton) was driving the truck of Atlantic. Construing the facts most favorably to the [639]*639plaintiff, Pettus and Parten were at best coemployees and we can envision no principal-agent relationship between them. Under these circumstances, there is no authority for service of a summons and complaint upon Pettus pursuant to section 253 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law (cf. De Concilius v Fry Roofing Co., 34 Misc 2d 430). Concur—Stevens, P. J., Markewich, Tilzer, Lane and Yesawich, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

48 A.D.2d 638, 368 N.Y.S.2d 22, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9626, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ripley-v-pettus-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack