MAVRIKIDIS V. PETULLO
707 A.2d 977 (1998)
NATURE OF THE CASE: Petullo (Ds) gas station and asphalt company sought review of a
decision, which reversed the trial court's judgment against D and remanded the matter for
determination of the degree of responsibility of the asphalt company and laborers in
Mavrikidis' (P) action for damages from an automobile accident.
FACTS: Mavrikidis (P) was severely burned in an automobile accident when her vehicle was
struck by a truck driven by Gerald Petullo (D) and registered to Petullo Brothers, Inc. (D)
The truck had run a red light, struck a telephone pole, and overturned, spilling its
contents of hot asphalt on P's car. At the time of the accident, Gerald was transporting the
asphalt to a job site at Clar Pine Servicenter (D), a retail gasoline and automotive repair
shop. Clar Pine (D) had hired Gerald's father, Angelo Petullo (D), to perform asphalt and
concrete work as part of the renovation of the service station. Petullo Brothers (D) was
indebted to Clar Pine (D) for between $ 12,000 and $ 20,000. In exchange for the asphalt
work, the parties orally agreed that Petullo Brothers (D) would receive a $ 6,800 credit
toward its debt. At the scene of the accident, Gerald (D) stated to the responding police
officer that he was unable to stop at the red light because of the load on his truck.
Tickets were issued for driving while on the suspended list and another for failure to stop
at a red light. Angelo (D) arrived on the scene to assist in cleaning up the asphalt, and
identified himself as the owner of Petullo Brothers. The officer issued three summonses to
Angelo -- one for driving while suspended, one for having no vehicle insurance, and one for
allowing an unlicensed driver (Gerald (D)) operate the vehicle. An inspection of Gerald's
truck revealed two weight violations: the truck's weight at the time of the accident
exceeded the gross vehicle weight for which it was registered; and the combined weight per
axle of the cargo and vehicle exceeded the statutory limit. In addition, the truck's right
rear brake was 'non-existent.' The testimony of plaintiff's expert indicated that the cause
of the accident was primarily due to the truck being excessively overloaded. The Petullos
(Ds) pleaded guilty in municipal court to driving while on the suspended list. Gerald (D)
also pleaded guilty to disregarding a traffic signal and failing to have insurance. Petullo
Brothers (D), through Gerald (D), pleaded guilty to operating an unsafe and overweight
vehicle. P got $ 750,000 in damages and $ 30,000 to her husband per quod. Clar Pine (D) was
determined to be 17 percent negligent for engaging a reckless contractor, that Clar Pine (D)
retained control of the 'manner and means' of performing the paving work, and that such work
was 'an inherently dangerous activity.' The court entered judgment against Clar Pine (D) for
89 Percent of the total damages awarded. The Appellate Division reversed with respect to
Clar Pine (D), holding that there was insufficient evidence to support a finding of
vicarious liability. It further found insufficient evidence to support a finding that Clar
Pine was independently negligent in hiring the Petullo Brothers (D).
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment