West v. Belleaire Service Stations, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

West v. Belleaire Service Stations, Inc.

2 A.D.2d 633, 151 N.Y.S.2d 739, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5492

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

DecidedMay 10, 1956

StatusPublished

This text of 2 A.D.2d 633 (West v. Belleaire Service Stations, Inc.) 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

West v. Belleaire Service Stations, Inc., 2 A.D.2d 633, 151 N.Y.S.2d 739, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5492 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment entered in Supreme Court, Clinton County, upon the decision of the Hon. Christopher J. Heeeernan, Official Referee. The action was one for work performed and materials furnished, allegedly “at the special instance and request of the defendant’s agents, representatives and managing officers ”. The proof showed that the work had been ordered by one Martin who coneedediy was not an employee of the defendant but an employee of another corporation known as Bingaman Motor Express Company, Inc. The latter corporation was the tenant in possession of the premises upon which the work was done. The defendant corporation was the owner of the premises. While it appears that the two corporations were interrelated to some extent, we may not, upon the basis of the present record, disregard the fact that the two corporations were separate entities. Judgment reversed, on the law and facts, and a new trial granted, without costs. Foster, P. J., Bergan, Coon, Halpern and Zeller, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment entered in Supreme Court, Clinton County, upon the decision of the Hon. Christopher J. Heeeernan, Official Referee. The action was one for work performed and materials furnished, allegedly “at the special instance and request of the defendant’s agents, representatives and managing officers ”. The proof showed that the work had been ordered by one Martin who coneedediy was not an employee of the defendant but an employee of another corporation known as Bingaman Motor Express Company, Inc. The latter corporation was the tenant in possession of the premises upon which the work was done. The defendant corporation was the owner of the premises. While it appears that the two corporations were interrelated to some extent, we may not, upon the basis of the present record, disregard the fact that the two corporations were separate entities. Judgment reversed, on the law and facts, and a new trial granted, without costs. Foster, P. J., Bergan, Coon, Halpern and Zeller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 A.D.2d 633, 151 N.Y.S.2d 739, 1956 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5492, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/west-v-belleaire-service-stations-inc-nyappdiv-1956.