Lopes v. Adams

Decision Date21 June 1971
Citation37 A.D.2d 610,323 N.Y.S.2d 605
PartiesAfonso M. LOPES, Plaintiff, and Domingos F. Nunes et al., Appellants-Respondents, v. Doris ADAMS et al., Respondents-Appellants, et al., Defendant, and J.C.P.Contracting Corp., Respondent.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Mary V. McGuire Swertlow, Brooklyn, for appellants-respondents, by Leonard Bernstein, Trial Counsel; Bernard Meyerson, Brooklyn, of counsel.

Patrick J. Hughes, New York City, for MVAIC on its own behalf and on behalf of defendants-appellants Doris Adams and Lawrence X. Adams.

Olmstead, Craig & Geen, New York City, for defendant-respondent, J.C.P. Contracting Corp.; John Nielsen, New York City, of counsel.

Before HOPKINS, Acting P.J., and MARTUSCELLO, SHAPIRO, GULOTTA, and BENJAMIN, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, (1) plaintiffs Nunes and Vieira appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of a judgment of Supreme Court, Queens County, entered February 9, 1970, as is against them and in favor of defendant J.C.P. Contracting Corp., upon the trial court's decision setting aside a jury verdict in their favor against said defendant and dismissing the complaint as to said defendant; and (2) Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation, on its own behalf and on behalf of defendants Adams, appeals from (a) an order of the same court, dated January 19, 1970, which dismissed the complaint of said plaintiffs as against defendant J.C.P. Contracting Corp. at the end of the entire case and directed a verdict in the latter's favor and (b) so much of said judgment as is against defendants Adams upon the jury verdict in favor of plaintiff Nunes in the amount of $20,500 and in favor of plaintiff Vieira in the amount of $4,500.

Appeal from order dismissed as academic, without costs, in view of the determination herein of the appeals from the judgment.

Judgment modified by deleting so much thereof as is in favor of defendant J.C.P. Contracting Corp. against plaintiffs Domingos F. Nunes and Manuel Vieira and jury verdict in favor of said plaintiffs against said defendant reinstated. As so modified, judgment affirmed insofar as appealed from.

Plaintiffs Nunes and Vieira are awarded a single bill of costs against defendant J.C.P. Contracting Corp. alone.

Plaintiffs Nunes and Vieira, construction workers, while working in the left southbound lane of the Van Wyck Expressway, in Queens, New York City, adjacent to the mall or road...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Ruocco v. L-k Bennett Enter.s
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • 15 Abril 2011
    ...even reckless, does not insulate Felix from liability (see Lopes v. Adams, 30 NY2d 499, 329 N.Y.S.2d 817, 280 N.E.2d 648, affg. 37 AD2d 610, 323 N.Y.S.2d 605; Restatement, Torts 2d s 449). Nor is it decisive that the driver lost control of the vehicle through a negligent failure to take med......
  • Derdiarian v. Felix Contracting Corp.
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • 20 Noviembre 1980
    ...reckless, does not insulate Felix from liability (see Lopes v. Adams, 30 N.Y.2d 499, 329 N.Y.S.2d 817, 280 N.E.2d 648, affg. 37 A.D.2d 610, 323 N.Y.S.2d 605; Restatement, Torts 2d § 449). Nor is it decisive that the driver lost control of the vehicle through a negligent failure to take medi......
  • Torrie v. Virtuoso Bldg. Co., Inc., 1
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 12 Julio 1977
    ...submitted to the jury the question of Virtuoso's control of the roof and responsibility for plaintiff's safety (see Lopes v. Adams, 37 A.D.2d 610, 611, 323 N.Y.S.2d 605, 607, affd., 30 N.Y.2d 499, 329 N.Y.S.2d 817, 280 N.E.2d 648; Buonassisi v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 43 A.D.2d 701, 702-703, ......
  • Derdiarian v. Felix Contracting Corp.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • 13 Agosto 1979
    ...so inadequate as to be negligent and whether such negligence was a substantial factor in bringing about the harm (see Lopes v. Adams, 37 A.D.2d 610, 323 N.Y.S.2d 605, affd. 30 N.Y.2d 499, 329 N.Y.S.2d 817, 280 N.E.2d Plaintiff's engineering expert testified that there is a difference betwee......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT