From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Feisthamel v. Roczen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 10, 1948
273 App. Div. 937 (N.Y. App. Div. 1948)

Opinion

March 10, 1948.

Present — Taylor, P.J., McCurn, Love, Vaughan and Kimball, JJ.


Judgment and order reversed on the law, with costs, and complaint dismissed, with costs. Memorandum: Concededly, the recovery in this action is based upon the negligent operation of a police patrol car by a police officer of the City of Utica, who, at the time of the accident, was acting in the performance of his duties and within the scope of his employment. The City of Utica was not made a party to the action. The complaint fails to allege filing with the city comptroller, or a corresponding officer, and with the defendant, of the notices required by section 50-c Gen. Mun. of the General Municipal Law as it read at the time of the accident, November 8, 1941. Under such circumstances, it was error for the trial court to deny defendant's motions to dismiss the complaint and for a directed verdict in defendant's favor. ( Gwydir v. Cowdell, 291 N.Y. 777; Kosiba v. City of Syracuse, 287 N.Y. 283; Derlicka v. Leo, 281 N.Y. 266; Krauss v. Layman, 261 App. Div. 102 6.) All concur, McCurn, J., in result only, on the ground that there is no proof in the record that any notice was served upon the city pursuant to the provisions of section 50-c Gen. Mun. of the General Municipal Law. (The judgment is for plaintiff in an automobile negligence action. The order denies a motion for a new trial.)


Summaries of

Feisthamel v. Roczen

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 10, 1948
273 App. Div. 937 (N.Y. App. Div. 1948)
Case details for

Feisthamel v. Roczen

Case Details

Full title:RUTH FEISTHAMEL, as Administratrix of the Estate of EDWARD C. FEISTHAMEL…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Mar 10, 1948

Citations

273 App. Div. 937 (N.Y. App. Div. 1948)

Citing Cases

Siegel v. Epstein

" It is undisputed that no notice of claim was here filed. Accordingly, defendant Valente is entitled to…

Rusch v. Karpick

Section 50-b Gen. Mun. of the General Municipal Law imposes upon the City of Buffalo ultimate liability for…