History
  • No items yet
midpage
Moon v. Tollefsen Bros.
14 A.D.2d 520
| N.Y. App. Div. | 1961
|
Check Treatment

The motion for summary judgment pursuant to rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice based upon a claim of res judicata must be denied where such a defense is not pleaded in the answer. (Grande v. Torello, 12 A D 2d 937; Halladay v. Kolner, 276 App. Div. 943.) The complaint alleges that the plaintiff was caused to slip on accumulations of sandblasting material and was violently precipitated into a large hole in the vessel. There was a finding of fact in the Federal court action that the accident was not caused by any loose sandblast shot in the area. But it also appears that in the conclusions of law the Federal court passed expressly only *521upon the liability of the United States of America. In ¿view of the general allegations in the complaint it may well be that such aford-mentioned finding would preclude plaintiff’s recovery in the instant action.' (Restatement of Judgment, § 68, comment w; ef. § 96, comment j.) Accordingly, the defendants should be permitted to raise such issues as an affirmative defense. Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Stevens and Eager, JJ. [28 Misc 2d 29.]

Case Details

Case Name: Moon v. Tollefsen Bros.
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Jul 6, 1961
Citation: 14 A.D.2d 520
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.