Citowitz v. City of New York

• Court: New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
• Writing for the Court: Before RABIN
• Citation: Citowitz v. City of New York, 430 N.Y.S.2d 135, 77 A.D.2d 642 (N.Y. App. Div. 1980)
• Decision Date: 28 July 1980
• Docket Number: No. 4,No. 2,No. 1,No. 3,1,2,3,4
• Parties: Richard CITOWITZ et al., Respondents, et al., Plaintiffs, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Appellants-Respondents. (Action) Walter MISCHKE et al., Respondents, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Appellants-Respondents. (Action) Alfred BOLD et al., Respondents-Appellants, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Appellants-Respondents, et al., Defendants. (Action) Thomas J. KILKENNY et al., Respondents, v. MOBIL OIL CORPORATION et al., Defendants, Third-Party Plaintiffs-Appellants-Respondents; The City of New York, Third-Party Defendant-Respondent-Appellant. (Action)

Page 135

430 N.Y.S.2d 135

77 A.D.2d 642

Richard CITOWITZ et al., Respondents, et al., Plaintiffs, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Appellants-Respondents.

(Action No. 1.)

Walter MISCHKE et al., Respondents, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Appellants-Respondents.

(Action No. 2.)

Alfred BOLD et al., Respondents-Appellants, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Appellants-Respondents, et al.,

Defendants. (Action No. 3.)

Thomas J. KILKENNY et al., Respondents, v. MOBIL OIL CORPORATION et al., Defendants, Third-Party

Plaintiffs-Appellants-Respondents;

The City of New York, Third-Party

Defendant-Respondent-Appellant. (Action No. 4.)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

July 28, 1980.

Crowe, McCoy, Agoglia, Fogarty & Zweibel, P.C., Mineola, Trial Counsel to Geoffrey A. Smith, New York City (Morris Zweibel and Harold V. McCoy, New York City, of counsel), for appellants-respondents Mobil Oil Corp. and Walter Block.

Allen G. Schwartz, Corporation Counsel, New York City (Bernard Abel and L. Kevin Sheridan, New York City, of counsel), for defendant-appellant-respondent City of New York.

Joseph F. Votto, Elmhurst (Frank S. Polestino, Jamaica, of counsel), for respondents-appellants Bold (Action No. 3).

Lipsig, Sullivan, Mollen & Liapakis, P.C., New York City (Pamela Anagnos Liapakis, New York City, of counsel), for respondents in Actions Nos. 1 and 2.

Joachim, Flanzig & Weissman and William Beasley, Jr., Mineola (Stanley Weissman, Mineola, of counsel), for respondents in Action No. 4).

Before RABIN, J. P., and GULOTTA, COHALAN and MARGETT, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

In consolidated actions to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., defendants Mobil Oil Corporation, Walter Block and the City of New York appeal from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated May 14, 1979, which set aside so much of the jury verdict as found plaintiffs guilty of contributory negligence and (2) an interlocutory judgment of the same court entered May 24, 1979, which is in favor of plaintiffs and against them upon a jury verdict, after a trial limited to the issue of liability only. Plaintiffs Bold cross-appeal from so much of the interlocutory judgment as reflects the trial court's dismissal of the cause of action against Mobil Oil and Block predicated on a theory of statutory liability under section 205-a of the General Municipal Law.

Interlocutory judgment and order affirmed, with one bill of costs payable jointly to plaintiffs appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The male plaintiffs were firemen who were injured by an explosion in their firehouse on May 14, 1974, as defendant Block, an employee of defendant Mobil Oil finished making a delivery of gasoline.

The jury's finding of negligence with respect to the defendants...