Ruppel v. Middleport Volunteer Fire Co. No. 1

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ruppel v. Middleport Volunteer Fire Co. No. 1

12 A.D.2d 871, 210 N.Y.S.2d 67, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13489

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

DecidedJanuary 5, 1961

StatusPublished

This text of 12 A.D.2d 871 (Ruppel v. Middleport Volunteer Fire Co. No. 1) 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

Ruppel v. Middleport Volunteer Fire Co. No. 1, 12 A.D.2d 871, 210 N.Y.S.2d 67, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13489 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

Order affirmed, with $25 costs and disbursements. Memorandum: These defenses are permissible in the first instance under section 205-b of the General Municipal Law. We pass upon [872]*872no other question. All concur, except Halpern, J., who dissents and votes to reverse and to strike out the affirmative defense in the answer of the incorporated fire companies, in the following memorandum: While the statute confers immunity upon the individual members, it does not, in my opinion, confer immunity upon the corporate entity. (Appeal from order of Niagara Special Term denying plaintiff’s motion to strike out defenses contained in the answer of the corporate defendants.) Present — Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Halpern, McClusky and Henry, JJ.

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

Order affirmed, with $25 costs and disbursements. Memorandum: These defenses are permissible in the first instance under section 205-b of the General Municipal Law. We pass upon [872]*872no other question. All concur, except Halpern, J., who dissents and votes to reverse and to strike out the affirmative defense in the answer of the incorporated fire companies, in the following memorandum: While the statute confers immunity upon the individual members, it does not, in my opinion, confer immunity upon the corporate entity. (Appeal from order of Niagara Special Term denying plaintiff’s motion to strike out defenses contained in the answer of the corporate defendants.) Present — Bastow, J. P., Goldman, Halpern, McClusky and Henry, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 A.D.2d 871, 210 N.Y.S.2d 67, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13489, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ruppel-v-middleport-volunteer-fire-co-no-1-nyappdiv-1961.