From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lyon v. Banks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 22, 1963
18 A.D.2d 1099 (N.Y. App. Div. 1963)

Opinion

April 22, 1963


In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injury, in which the three defendants named Banks interposed a third-party complaint, the said defendants and third-party plaintiffs appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered April 9, 1962 after trial, upon a jury's verdict in favor of plaintiff and upon the court's decision (rendered after the verdict pursuant to stipulation) in favor of the third-party defendant, dismissing the third-party complaint. Judgment modified on the law and the facts as follows: (1) by striking out its first decretal paragraph directing that plaintiff recover of the three defendants Banks the sum of $145,216; and (2) by substituting therefor a provision dismissing the complaint on the law against said defendants. As so modified, judgment affirmed, without costs. On this record, and under the applicable law, plaintiff did not establish: (a) that there was any duty owing to him by the defendants Banks which was violated by them; (b) that there was any causal relationship between the accident and anything that said defendants did or failed to do; and (c) that he was free from contributory negligence. In view of our determination that the main complaint must be dismissed, the trial court's dismissal of the third-party complaint should be affirmed. Beldock, P.J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Rabin, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Lyon v. Banks

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 22, 1963
18 A.D.2d 1099 (N.Y. App. Div. 1963)
Case details for

Lyon v. Banks

Case Details

Full title:RANDOLPH G. LYON, Respondent, v. JOSEPHINE A. BANKS et al., Copartners…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Apr 22, 1963

Citations

18 A.D.2d 1099 (N.Y. App. Div. 1963)

Citing Cases

Matter of Burress v. Alexander

It has been repeatedly held that Executive Law § 259-i does not create in any prisoner an entitlement to, or…