Tarr v. Seekonk Corp.

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Tarr v. Seekonk Corp.

191 Misc. 678, 78 N.Y.S.2d 811, 1948 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2317

CourtAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

DecidedApril 1, 1948

StatusPublished

This text of 191 Misc. 678 (Tarr v. Seekonk Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Tarr v. Seekonk Corp., 191 Misc. 678, 78 N.Y.S.2d 811, 1948 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2317 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1948).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff may not recover in an action for maintenance and cure for items included in a recovery in his [679]*679action for full indemnity (Krey v. United States, 123 F. 2d 1008). The record of the trial does not disclose whether the item of wages for which a recovery was had in the indemnity action is identical with the item of maintenance in the present case.

The judgment should be reversed and new trial ordered* with $30 costs to appellant to abide the event.

Hammer, Church and Eder, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed, etc.

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