Opalek v. Oshrain

Decision Date29 September 1969
CitationOpalek v. Oshrain, 305 N.Y.S.2d 675, 33 A.D.2d 521 (N.Y. App. Div. 1969)
PartiesDavid OPALEK et al., Appellants, v. Leonard OSHRAIN, Respondent.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

Martin H. Rettinger, New York City, for plaintiff-appellants.

Schaffner & Lawless, Brooklyn, for defendant-respondent, Harold L. Cowin, Trial Counsel; Harold L. Cowin, Edward H. Schiff, Brooklyn, of counsel.

Before BELDOCK, P.J., and CHRIST, BRENNAN, RABIN and KLEINFELD, JJ.

MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated April 16, 1969, which denied their motion for summary judgment and an assessment of damages.

Order reversed, on the law, with $40 costs and disbursements, and motion granted.

Plaintiffs were passengers in an automobile which was struck in the rear by defendant's automobile. The accident occurred at 2 P.M. on a Sunday afternoon in extremely heavy traffic on a major highway in Queens County. Defendant admits that immediately prior to the accident he had been proceeding at between 5 and 10 miles per hour. Then he 'looked down' on his right seat 'and didn't see the car in front of' him. At his examination before trial he admitted further that at the scene of the accident he said to the people in the front car, 'It was my fault.'

The learned Special Term Justice, in denying plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment, asserted that there are issues of fact to be tried. We disagree and are unable to find any in this fact pattern. Even defendant's affidavit in opposition, which embellishes his earlier narrations in his MV104 report and in his examination before trial, did not, by adding that he looked down from the road only for a ...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
9 cases
  • Andre v. Pomeroy
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • November 21, 1974
    ...v. King, 33 A.D.2d 879, 307 N.Y.S.2d 515 (plaintiff's car struck parked car in rear, directed verdict denied); contra, Opalek v. Oshrain, 33 A.D.2d 521, 305 N.Y.S.2d 675 (facts as in this case but defendant admitted The crucial question, which must be answered in the affirmative if plaintif......
  • Forbes v. Plume
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • March 17, 1994
    ...negligence as matter of law" (Silberman v. Surrey Cadillac Limousine Serv., 109 A.D.2d 833, 486 N.Y.S.2d 357; see, Opalek v. Oshrain, 33 A.D.2d 521, 305 N.Y.S.2d 675). Similarly, we find that defendant has failed to offer proof in admissible form that plaintiff could have done something to ......
  • Tran v. Avis Rent a Car
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • December 13, 2001
    ...361, 365; Altmajer v Morley, 274 A.D.2d 364, 365; Metzler v Brawley, 209 A.D.2d 487; Aurnou v Craig, 184 A.D.2d 1048, 1048-1049; Opalek v Oshrain, 33 A.D.2d 521; Gerard v Inglese, 11 A.D.2d 381). Nothing in the record supports defendants' conjecture that plaintiff's supplying Yee with the d......
  • Ross v. Nelson
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • February 14, 1973
    ...LoBue, 59 Misc.2d 755, 300 N.Y.S.2d 907, rev'd 30 A.D.2d 552, 291 N.Y.S.2d 791, rev'd 24 N.Y.2d 896, 301 N.Y.S.2d 635; Opalek v. Oshrain, 33 A.D.2d 521, 305 N.Y.S.2d 675 (looked away before accident); Gerard v. Inglese, 11 A.D.2d 381, 206 N.Y.S.2d 879 (took eyes off road while lighting ciga......
  • Get Started for Free