Wineck v. Yanoff

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wineck v. Yanoff

265 A.D. 835, 37 N.Y.S.2d 563, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6038

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

DecidedOctober 19, 1942

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 265 A.D. 835 (Wineck v. Yanoff) 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

Wineck v. Yanoff, 265 A.D. 835, 37 N.Y.S.2d 563, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6038 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

The plaintiffs’ complaint alleges acts for some of which the appellant might be responsible and for some of which the landlord might be solely responsible. The appellant would not be liable over to the defendant landlord for damages sustained by plaintiffs due solely to negligent acts of the landlord, and such acts are alleged in the plaintiffs’ complaint. There is nothing in the record to show that a judgment may ever be entered in favor of plaintiffs solely for damages caused by the appellant gas company. It would seem that defendants [836]*836are bound to the status of joint tortfeasors, which is alleged in the complaint, and in such ease there is no right of indemnity. (Nichols v. Clark, MacMullen & Riley, Inc. 261 N. Y. 118, 122, 123; Schwartz v. Crawford, 261 App. Div. 825.) Lazansky, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Close, JJ., concur.

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

The plaintiffs’ complaint alleges acts for some of which the appellant might be responsible and for some of which the landlord might be solely responsible. The appellant would not be liable over to the defendant landlord for damages sustained by plaintiffs due solely to negligent acts of the landlord, and such acts are alleged in the plaintiffs’ complaint. There is nothing in the record to show that a judgment may ever be entered in favor of plaintiffs solely for damages caused by the appellant gas company. It would seem that defendants [836]*836are bound to the status of joint tortfeasors, which is alleged in the complaint, and in such ease there is no right of indemnity. (Nichols v. Clark, MacMullen & Riley, Inc. 261 N. Y. 118, 122, 123; Schwartz v. Crawford, 261 App. Div. 825.) Lazansky, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Close, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

265 A.D. 835, 37 N.Y.S.2d 563, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6038, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wineck-v-yanoff-nyappdiv-1942.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack