Legal Opinion

Chikofsky v. State

New York Court of Claims

Decided December 3, 1952No. Claim No. 31187PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSylvestee, J.

The State moves to dismiss the claim for failure to state a cause of action. The pleading alleges that claimant was injured as a result of an accident involving his car with that of one Grasso, whose operator’s license and registration had been previously suspended by the Bureau of Motor Vehicles. In brief, it is the theory of the action that the State’s failure to take “ physical ” possession of G-rasso’s operator’s license and registration, after suspension, was responsible for the injuries. It is alleged also that Grasso should not have been licensed to drive in the first instance because…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Steitz v. City of BeaconNew York Court of Appeals · 1945
  2. Murrain v. Wilson Line, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1946
  3. Murrain v. Wilson Line, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1947
  4. Paglia v. StateAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1951
  5. Paglia v. StateNew York Court of Appeals · 1952

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Guillot v. STATE, THROUGH LA STATE POLICELouisiana Court of Appeal · 1979
  2. Bockelman v. State, Department of TransportationSupreme Court of Iowa · 1985
  3. Thomas v. South Carolina Department of Highways & Public TransportationCourt of Appeals of South Carolina · 1995
  4. Craver v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1953
  5. Heiston v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 1959

3 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