Taylor v. INTERSTATE MOTOR FRGT. SYS.

CourtNew York Court of Appeals
Citation309 N.Y. 633
Decision Date17 February 1956
PartiesMary A. Taylor, as Administratrix of The Estate of Frank E. Taylor, Deceased, Appellant,<BR>v.<BR>Interstate Motor Freight System, Respondent.

309 N.Y. 633

Mary A. Taylor, as Administratrix of The Estate of Frank E. Taylor, Deceased, Appellant,
v.
Interstate Motor Freight System, Respondent.

Argued November 16, 1955.Decided February 17, 1956


John P. Cox, William J. Flynn, Joseph Swart and Edward J. Murty, Jr., for appellant.

John F. Canale and Mortimer Allen Sullivan for respondent.

CONWAY, Ch. J., DESMOND, FROESSEL, VAN VOORHIS and BURKE, JJ., concur in Per Curiam opinion; DYE, J., taking no part.

[309 N.Y. 634]

Per Curiam.

This action was brought by plaintiff to recover for the wrongful death of her husband as a result of a collision

[309 N.Y. 635]

which occurred in the State of Ohio. Decedent was the driver of one of two tractor-trailer trucks involved in the accident. He resided in Pennsylvania.

The tractor-trailer truck driven by the decedent was owned by New York Car Carriers, Inc., a New York corporation having its office in Buffalo, New York. He was an employee of New York Car Carriers, Inc. He reported to and was paid by the Buffalo, New York, office of the New York Car Carriers, Inc. At the time of the accident, the decedent was engaged in the course of his employment. The decedent's widow and children have been awarded benefits by the Workmen's Compensation Board of the Department of Labor of New York State.

The other tractor-trailer truck was owned by Interstate Motor Freight System, a Michigan corporation, the defendant. A certificate of authority to do business in New York State had been issued to Interstate upon its statement and designation, making the Secretary of State its agent for the purpose of accepting service. Interstate had an office for the transaction of business in the city of Buffalo, New York. It transacts its trucking business throughout the State. Service of the summons was made on the Secretary of State.

On February 9, 1954, under section 29 of the Workmen's Compensation Law, Michigan Mutual, the insurer, served a notice upon the widow to commence a third-party action against any other party responsible for her husband's death. Her failure to commence her action before March 11, 1954, would operate to assign her cause of action to Michigan Mutual, the insurer.

Mrs. Taylor commenced this action on March 9, 1954. By respective statutes, the time within which to commence an action in Pennsylvania expired on October 1, 1953, and in New York, Ohio and Michigan, on September 30, 1954.

Special Term denied the motion of the defendant to vacate service of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 practice notes
  • Hill v. Upper Mississippi Towing Corp., No. 37297
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Minnesota (US)
    • April 11, 1958
    ...& Iron Co., 235 N.Y. 152, 160, 139 N.E. 223, 226, 32 A.L.R. 1.' (Italics supplied.) See, also, Taylor v. Interstate Motor Freight System, 309 N.Y. 633, 132 N.E.2d 878, and 1 A.D.2d 933, 150 N.Y.S.2d 84, appeal dismissed, 1 N.Y.2d 925, 154 N.Y.S.2d 986, 136 N.E.2d 924. As to the jurisdiction......
  • Varkonyi v. S. A. Empresa De Viacao Airea Rio Grandense (Varig)
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (New York)
    • June 14, 1968
    ...factors entitled to consideration, it commits error of law reviewable by this court. (See, e.g., Taylor v. Interstate Motor Frgt. System, 309 N.Y. 633, 132 N.E.2d 878; de la Bouillerie v. de Vienne, 300 N.Y. 60, 89 N.E.2d 15, 48 A.L.R.2d 798; see, also, Cohen and Karger, Powers of the New Y......
  • Ginsburg v. Hearst Publishing Co.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • February 18, 1958
    ...& Reading Coal & Iron Co., 235 N.Y. 152, 160, 139 N.E. 223, 226, 32 A.L.R. 1.)' See also: Taylor v. Interstate Motor Freight System, 309 N.Y. 633, 132 N.E.2d 878; and 1 A.D.2d 933, 150 N.Y.S.2d 84, appeal dismissed 1 N.Y.2d 925, 154 N.Y.S.2d On the record here, Special Term's refusal to tak......
  • Decatur v. Ahearn
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • July 29, 1982
    ..."special and unusual circumstances" warranting continued acceptance of this action in New York (Taylor v. Interstate Motor Frgt. System, 309 N.Y. 633, 636, 132 N.E.2d 878). Nor does Burch's residence in New York preclude us from staying or dismissing the action (CPLR 327; Silver v. Great Am......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
14 cases
  • Hill v. Upper Mississippi Towing Corp., No. 37297
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Minnesota (US)
    • April 11, 1958
    ...& Iron Co., 235 N.Y. 152, 160, 139 N.E. 223, 226, 32 A.L.R. 1.' (Italics supplied.) See, also, Taylor v. Interstate Motor Freight System, 309 N.Y. 633, 132 N.E.2d 878, and 1 A.D.2d 933, 150 N.Y.S.2d 84, appeal dismissed, 1 N.Y.2d 925, 154 N.Y.S.2d 986, 136 N.E.2d 924. As to the jurisdiction......
  • Varkonyi v. S. A. Empresa De Viacao Airea Rio Grandense (Varig)
    • United States
    • United States Court of Appeals (New York)
    • June 14, 1968
    ...factors entitled to consideration, it commits error of law reviewable by this court. (See, e.g., Taylor v. Interstate Motor Frgt. System, 309 N.Y. 633, 132 N.E.2d 878; de la Bouillerie v. de Vienne, 300 N.Y. 60, 89 N.E.2d 15, 48 A.L.R.2d 798; see, also, Cohen and Karger, Powers of the New Y......
  • Ginsburg v. Hearst Publishing Co.
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • February 18, 1958
    ...& Reading Coal & Iron Co., 235 N.Y. 152, 160, 139 N.E. 223, 226, 32 A.L.R. 1.)' See also: Taylor v. Interstate Motor Freight System, 309 N.Y. 633, 132 N.E.2d 878; and 1 A.D.2d 933, 150 N.Y.S.2d 84, appeal dismissed 1 N.Y.2d 925, 154 N.Y.S.2d On the record here, Special Term's refusal to tak......
  • Decatur v. Ahearn
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court Appellate Division
    • July 29, 1982
    ..."special and unusual circumstances" warranting continued acceptance of this action in New York (Taylor v. Interstate Motor Frgt. System, 309 N.Y. 633, 636, 132 N.E.2d 878). Nor does Burch's residence in New York preclude us from staying or dismissing the action (CPLR 327; Silver v. Great Am......
  • 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