Shearer v. Mooney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Shearer v. Mooney

109 A.D.2d 1104, 487 N.Y.S.2d 206, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 47609

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

DecidedMarch 1, 1985

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 109 A.D.2d 1104 (Shearer v. Mooney) 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

Shearer v. Mooney, 109 A.D.2d 1104, 487 N.Y.S.2d 206, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 47609 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs, and motion denied. Memorandum: A cause of action for loss of services and society of a spouse is predicated upon physical or mental injury or incapacity of that spouse (see, Millington v Southeastern Elevator Co., 22 NY2d 498, 504; 15 NY Jur, Domestic Relations, § 302 [rev ed]; Prosser and Keeton, Torts § 125, at 932 [5th ed 1984]; Restatement [Second] of Torts § 693 [1977]). In this legal malpractice action there is no allegation of physical or mental injury or incapacity inflicted upon either spouse; hence, Special Term should not have granted permission to amend the complaint to add the cause of action for loss of consortium. (Appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Bergin, J. — amend complaint.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Denman, Boomer and O’Donnell, JJ.

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

— Order unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs, and motion denied. Memorandum: A cause of action for loss of services and society of a spouse is predicated upon physical or mental injury or incapacity of that spouse (see, Millington v Southeastern Elevator Co., 22 NY2d 498, 504; 15 NY Jur, Domestic Relations, § 302 [rev ed]; Prosser and Keeton, Torts § 125, at 932 [5th ed 1984]; Restatement [Second] of Torts § 693 [1977]). In this legal malpractice action there is no allegation of physical or mental injury or incapacity inflicted upon either spouse; hence, Special Term should not have granted permission to amend the complaint to add the cause of action for loss of consortium. (Appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Bergin, J. — amend complaint.) Present — Dillon, P. J., Denman, Boomer and O’Donnell, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

109 A.D.2d 1104, 487 N.Y.S.2d 206, 1985 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 47609, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shearer-v-mooney-nyappdiv-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack