Vaughan v. Globe Neon Sign Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Vaughan v. Globe Neon Sign Co.

10 A.D.2d 568, 195 N.Y.S.2d 420, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12027

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 26, 1960·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Order unanimously reversed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the appellant, and the motion to dismiss the third-party complaint on the ground of insufficiency is granted, with $10 costs. A reading of the complaint, as well as the third-party pleading, requires the conclusion that the third-party plaintiff, if liable at all, can only be held responsible as an active or primary tort-feasor. Under the circumstances a judgment over could not be sustained. (See Putvin v. Buffalo Elec. Co., 5 N Y 2d 447, 456-457.) Concur —Rabin, J. P., M. M. Frank, Valente, McNally and Stevens, JJ.

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

Order unanimously reversed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the appellant, and the motion to dismiss the third-party complaint on the ground of insufficiency is granted, with $10 costs. A reading of the complaint, as well as the third-party pleading, requires the conclusion that the third-party plaintiff, if liable at all, can only be held responsible as an active or primary tort-feasor. Under the circumstances a judgment over could not be sustained. (See Putvin v. Buffalo Elec. Co., 5 N Y 2d 447, 456-457.) Concur —Rabin, J. P., M. M. Frank, Valente, McNally and Stevens, JJ.

Vaughan v. Globe Neon Sign Co., 10 A.D.2d 568, 195 N.Y.S.2d 420, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12027 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

10 A.D.2d 568 (Vaughan v. Globe Neon Sign Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related