Skalko v. Barrett

70 A.D.2d 510, 415 N.Y.S.2d 856, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11867
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 3, 1979
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 70 A.D.2d 510 (Skalko v. Barrett) 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
Skalko v. Barrett, 70 A.D.2d 510, 415 N.Y.S.2d 856, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11867 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1979).

Opinion

—Order and judgment (two papers), Supreme Court, New York County, entered October 6, 1977 and February 28, 1978, respectively, granting summary judgment to the defendant, unanimously modified, on the law, to the extent of denying summary judgment as to the first, second, and fourth causes of action and merging all into one cause of action for conversion, including therein punitive damages as an element of damages, severing the action as to the third cause, and otherwise affirmed, with one bill of costs to plaintiff. Frank Skalko’s wife, Ivanica, was buried in St. Mary’s Cemetery in Rahway, New Jersey, in September, 1971. The funeral was arranged by Thomas V. Barrett, doing business as John J. Barrett & Son. This included preparing the body for burial and furnishing a waterproof casket. It was intended that the body would eventually be disinterred and reburied in Olib, Yugoslavia. In 1973, James E. Corey, Jr., doing business as Corey & Corey Funeral Home, was retained to perform the disinterment. When the body reached Yugoslavia, Frank Skalko discovered that in place of the original expensive casket which he purchased, the body was in a "Ziegler” utility case, an inexpensive tin casket. An inquest was held at the grave site by order of the local Yugoslavian municipal court, and the body was determined to be in good condition "without progressing rotteness [sic]/decomposition/changes.” Skalko sued Barrett for breach of warranty for failure to provide a waterproof airtight casket and sued others involved in the initial interment and the subsequent disinterment. The defendants all moved for summary judgment in their favor. Special Term granted the motion. Plaintiff has appealed only from so much of the order of Special Term which granted summary judgment in favor of James E. Corey, Jr., doing business as Corey & Corey Funeral Home.

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

Related

United States v. Spiegelman
4 F. Supp. 2d 275 (S.D. New York, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
70 A.D.2d 510, 415 N.Y.S.2d 856, 1979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11867, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/skalko-v-barrett-nyappdiv-1979.