History
  • No items yet
midpage
Itri v. Grotsky
1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10645
| N.Y. App. Div. | 1962
|
Check Treatment

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff, an employee of Viking Buiek, Inc., as a result of the alleged negligent maintenance and operation of a motor vehicle owned by defendant Grotsky and operated by Joseph Ammutai, in which the defendant Grotsky pleaded an affirmative defense that the Workmen’s Compensation Law barred the action, and in which said defendant also served a third-party complaint demanding judgment over against Ammutai and Viking Buiek Inc., his employer, the said third-party defendants (Ammutai and Viking) appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated January 6, 1961, which denied their motions, pursuant to subdivision 4 of rule 106 of the Rules of Civil Practice and section 193-a of the Civil Practice Act, to dismiss the third-party complaint on the ground that it does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements (cf. Frady v. Weiss & Sons, 6 A D 2d 241; Mitchell v. A. A. Truck Renting Corp., 9 A D 2d 682). Beldock, P. J., Kleinfeld, Brennan, Hill and Rabin, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Itri v. Grotsky
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Apr 2, 1962
Citation: 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10645
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.