From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

De Rasmo v. Long Island Lighting Co.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jun 15, 1967
20 N.Y.2d 665 (N.Y. 1967)

Opinion

Argued May 16, 1967

Decided June 15, 1967

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Second Judicial Department, WILLIAM J. SULLIVAN, J.

Francis M. Walsh and David K. Kadane for Long Island Lighting Company, appellant.

David S. Konheim for Tanwood at Massapequa, Inc., appellant-respondent.

Roger P. McTiernan, Desmond T. Barry and Michael R. Treanor for third-party defendant-respondent-appellant.

Vincent M. Albanese and Thomas R. Newman for plaintiff-respondent.

G. Wallace Bates and Kenneth J. Lucey for New York Telephone Company, appellant-respondent.


Judgment affirmed, with costs to plaintiff against defendant Long Island Lighting Company and with costs to each third-party respondent against the corresponding third-party appellant; no opinion.

Concur: Chief Judge FULD and Judges BURKE, SCILEPPI, BERGAN, KEATING and BREITEL. Judge VAN VOORHIS dissents, in part, and votes to reverse and to dismiss the complaint as to defendant Tanwood upon the ground that no actionable negligence has been shown upon its part. Moreover, if defendant Tanwood were to be chargeable with negligence, as the court is holding, it would necessarily be active negligence which would preclude indemnification from the Long Island Lighting Company.


Summaries of

De Rasmo v. Long Island Lighting Co.

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jun 15, 1967
20 N.Y.2d 665 (N.Y. 1967)
Case details for

De Rasmo v. Long Island Lighting Co.

Case Details

Full title:GRAZIA DE RASMO, as Administratrix of the Estate of DOMINIC DE RASMO…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jun 15, 1967

Citations

20 N.Y.2d 665 (N.Y. 1967)
282 N.Y.S.2d 276
229 N.E.2d 57

Citing Cases

Kelly v. Long Island Lighting Co.

But I dissent from the majority's holding insofar as it affirms the dismissal of Herrick's cross complaint…