Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1948

Tarr v. Seekonk Corp.

Tarr v. Seekonk Corp.
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided April 1, 1948
191 Misc. 678; 78 N.Y.S.2d 811; 1948 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2317

Counsel

Arthur M. Boal for appellant., Robert Mishkin and Richard M. Cantor for respondent.

Tarr v. Seekonk Corp.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

The plaintiff may not recover in an action for maintenance and cure for items included in a recovery in his *679action for full indemnity (Krey v. United States, 123 F. 2d 1008). The record of the trial does not disclose whether the item of wages for which a recovery was had in the indemnity action is identical with the item of maintenance in the present case.

The judgment should be reversed and new trial ordered* with $30 costs to appellant to abide the event.

Hammer, Church and Eder, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed, etc.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.