Hyperlawhypertext legal databasebeta Kirchhoff v. County of Erie 18 N.Y.2d 849

← Cases

Kirchhoff v. County of Erie

18 N.Y.2d 849 Court N.Y. Decision date 1966-10-27 Docket Action No. 1; Action No. 2; Action No. 3; Action No. 4; Action No. 5; Action No. 6; Action No. 7 English

Judges Concur: Judges Fuld, Van Voorhis, Burke, Scileppi, Beegan and Keating. Chief Judge Desmond dissents and votes to reverse and to remit the case to the Appellate Division for determination of the questions of fact raised on this record as to the causative effect of the county’s negligence, in failing to keep the center line marked.

Contents

Majority

p. 849
Leon Kirchhoff, Jr., as Administrator of the Estate of Leon Kirchhoff, III, Deceased, Appellant, v. County of Erie, Respondent, et al., Defendants. Anthony R. Benbynek, Appellant, v. County of Erie, Respondent, et al., Defendants. Edmund Paliwodzinski, as Administrator of the Estate of Rose M. Paliwodzinski, Deceased, Appellant, v. County of Erie, Respondent, et al., Defendants. Anthony S. Benbynek, as Administrator of the Estate of Diane Benbynek, Deceased, Appellant, v. County of Erie, Respondent, et al., Defendants. Anthony S. Benbynek, as Administrator of the Estate of Elaine Benbynek, Deceased, Appellant, v. County of Erie, Respondent, et al., Defendants. Anthony S. Benbynek, as Administrator of the Estate of Florence Benbynek, Deceased, Appellant, v. County of Erie, Respondent, et al., Defendants. Doris M. Sawyer, Individually and as Administratrix of the Estate of C. Brian Sperduti, Deceased, Appellant, v. County of Erie, Respondent, et al., Defendant.
(Action No. 1.)
(Action No. 2.)
(Action No. 3.)
(Action No. 4.)
(Action No. 5.)
(Action No. 6.)
(Action No. 7.)
Argued September 19, 1966;
decided October 27, 1966.
p. 851
William J. Flynn, Jr., Alfred M. Zisser and Berenice 8. Alpern for appellants.
John F. Rafferty and John M. Freyer for respondent.

In each action: Order affirmed, without costs; no opinion.

Concur: Judges Fuld, Van Voorhis, Burke, Scileppi, Beegan and Keating. Chief Judge Desmond dissents and votes to reverse and to remit the case to the Appellate Division for determination of the questions of fact raised on this record as to the causative effect of the county’s negligence, in failing to keep the center line marked.