Legal Opinion

Duignan v. Pawlikowski

New York Supreme Court

Decided April 29, 1929PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHinkley, J.

This motion presents an interesting, novel and important question. A passenger in one of two colliding automobiles sued both owners, who were also the drivers, and' recovered judgment against both. Later, one owner brought this action against the other, not for contribution but for damages to the former's automobile by the other owner. The question thus arises, Is the doctrine of res judicata available to the defendant herein, upon the ground that a jury has determined that plaintiff in this action was, at the time of the collision, guilty of negligence that contributed thereto?

Viewed in the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Fulton County Gas & Electric Co. v. Hudson River Telephone Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1911
  2. Baldwin v. HanecyIllinois Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Devin v. City of OttumwaSupreme Court of Iowa · 1880
  4. Baugert v. . BladesSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1895
  5. Erie Railroad v. BuffaloAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1927

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Michel v. McKennaWisconsin Supreme Court · 1929
  2. Bailey v. RoatNew York Supreme Court · 1942
  3. Boice v. PalletteNew York Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Neenan v. Woodside Astoria Transportation Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1932
  5. Buffalo Porcelain Enameling Corp. v. London Assurance Corp.New York Supreme Court · 1929

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API