Legal Opinion
Petro v. Eisenberg
New York Supreme Court
Decided February 7, 1955PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHallinan, J.
Although the cross complaint interposed by the defendant Pelham is conclusory (Shass v. Abgold Realty Corp., 277 App. Div. 346), the challenge of its legal sufficiency by the defendant Eisenberg is limited to the claim that no judgment over may be awarded in favor of one joint tort-feasor against another, where the negligent acts of the party seeking such indemnity concurred in the wrong which caused the damage to the plaintiff. (Fox v. Western New York Motor Lines, 257 N. Y. 305 ; Secor v. Levine, 273 App. Div. 899.)
The plaintiffs commenced this action to recover damages for personal…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Gochee v. WagnerNew York Court of Appeals · 1931
- Fox v. Western New York Motor Lines, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1931
- Mills v. GabrielNew York Court of Appeals · 1940
- Mills v. GabrielAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1940
- Plaumbo v. RyanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Singerman Bus Corp. v. American Fidelity Fire InsuranceNew York Supreme Court · 1964
- Lipsman v. WarrenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1960
- Petzold v. Avis Rent-A-Car System, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1960