Connell v. Buitekant
| Decision Date | 29 November 1962 |
| Citation | 17 A.D.2d 944,234 N.Y.S.2d 336 |
| Parties | Margaret CONNELL, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Michael Levy BUITEKANT, Defendant-Appellant. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
B. Metviner, New York City, for plaintiff-respondent.
R. V. Rafter, Manhasset, for defendant-appellant.
Before BOTEIN, P. J., and VALENTE, McNALLY, STEVENS and STEUER, JJ.
Order, entered on September 18, 1962, granting plaintiff summary judgment pursuant to Rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice, in an action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained in a rear-end automobile collision, unanimously reversed, on the law, with $20 costs and disbursements to defendant-appellant, and the motion denied with $10 costs. Issues of fact are raised as to whether defendant was negligent or whether the collision was unavoidable. That defendant did not personally submit an affidavit in opposition to the motion does not require the granting of plaintiff's motion where plaintiff's papers in quoting from the examination before trial of defendant indicate the existence of a triable issue. (See Ortiz v. Knighton, 14 A.D.2d 679, 219 N.Y.S.2d 802.) This case represents another illustration of the wisdom of the cautionary observation inSchneider v. Miecznikowski, 16 A.D.2d 177, 226 N.Y.S.2d 944, that summary judgment 'may not properly be invoked in automobile accident cases, except in rare instances.'
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Richards v. The Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co. Inc
...appropriate in negligence cases. See Vandewater v. Sears, 277 A.D.2d 1056, 716 N.Y.S.2d 495 (4th Dept. 2000); Connell v. Buitekant, 17 A.D.2d 944, 234 N.Y.S.2d 336 (1st Dept. 1962). Based upon the above, the Court concludes that the evidence provided by plaintiffs clearly raises genuine iss......
-
Kaiser v. State
...A.D.2d 163, 164, 268 N.Y.S.2d 281, 282, app. dsmd. not final order 17 N.Y.2d 911, 272 N.Y.S.2d 133, 218 N.E.2d 899; Connell v. Buitekant, 17 A.D.2d 944, 234 N.Y.S.2d 336; Schneider v. Miecznikowski, 16 A.D.2d 177, 178, 226 N.Y.S.2d 944, 945; Gerard v. Inglese, 11 A.D.2d 381, 383, 206 N.Y.S.......
-
Spindell v. Town Of Hempstead
...21 A.D.2d 156, 249 N.Y.S.2d 458 (3d Dept. 1964). Summary judgment is rarely granted in negligence cases. See Connell v. Buitekant, 17 A.D.2d 944, 234 N.Y.S.2d 336 (1st Dept. 1962). Defendant Scheurer states that it is entitled to summary judgment since plaintiffs explanations of how the acc......
-
Lucey v. Carman, 2010 NY Slip Op 31169(U) (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 5/3/2010)
...(Weiss v. Garfield, 21 A.D.2d 156 [3rd Dept. 1964]). Summary judgment is rarely granted in negligence cases. (Connell v. Buitekant, 17 A.D.2d 944 [1st Dept. In a personal injury action, a summary judgment motion seeking to dismiss the complaint requires that a defendant establish a prima fa......