Schreyer v. Village of Tuckahoe
This text of 90 A.D.2d 828 (Schreyer v. Village of Tuckahoe) 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.
Opinion
In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, in which the defendant Village of Tuckahoe, inter alia, served a third-party complaint upon Pfaff & Kendall Co., said defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Slifkin, J.), dated October 9,1981, which granted a motion by the third-party defendant Pfaff & Kendall Co., pursuant to CPLR 1010, to sever the third-party action from the main action. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. Considering the record in its entirety, we are of the view that Special Term did not abuse its discretion in granting the severance (see Cipollina v Kent, 52 AD2d 632; Todd v Gull Contr. Co., 22 AD2d 904; see, also, Strange v Sampson, 73 AD2d 749; Vita Food Prods. v Epstein & Sons, 52 AD2d 522). Damiani, J. P., Gulotta, O’Connor and Brown, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
90 A.D.2d 828, 456 N.Y.S.2d 990, 1982 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19074, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schreyer-v-village-of-tuckahoe-nyappdiv-1982.