Legal Opinion

Curran v. Matson

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 8, 1942PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDeyo, J.

This is a negligence action wherein the defendants at the time the motion was argued had interposed only a general denial. The defendants by notice seek to examine the plaintiff on the question of whether or not the plaintiff has settled with a third person, one Edson J. Barrett, who is claimed to be a joint tort feasor, and if so, the amount of such settlement. I have been informed that since the motion was argued the defendants have amended their answer to allege by way of an affirmative defense .the giving of a release or covenant not to sue. However, I feel that I am obliged to determine…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Knapp v. . RocheNew York Court of Appeals · 1884
  2. Boxberger v. . N.Y., N.H. H.R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1923
  3. Telford v. Metropolitan Life InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1928
  4. Etter v. Early Foundry Co.New York Supreme Court · 1937
  5. Ammerman v. Utilities Oil Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1928

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Wheeler v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1955
  2. Western Rebuilders & Tractor Parts, Inc. v. FelmleyOregon Supreme Court · 1964
  3. Western Rebuilders & Tractor Parts, Inc. v. FelmleyOregon Supreme Court · 1964

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

Powered by the Exa API