Rue v. Stokes
| Decision Date | 11 March 1993 |
| Citation | 191 A.D.2d 245,594 N.Y.S.2d 749 |
| Parties | Wendy RUE, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Christopher STOKES, et al., Defendants-Respondents, Felice Serpico, et al., Defendant-Appellants . |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Before SULLIVAN, J.P., and ROSENBERGER, WALLACH and ASCH, JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Irma Vidal Santaella, J.), entered December 10, 1991, denying the cross-motion of defendants Felice Serpico and Leslie Supply Company, Inc., for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of defendants-appellants dismissing and severing the complaint as to them.
Plaintiff, a passenger in a leased vehicle, owned by defendant Gaines Service Leasing Corp. and operated by Christopher Stokes, named but never served in this action and last heard from six and one-half years ago, which struck the rear of a vehicle owned by defendant Leslie Supply Company, Inc., and operated by defendant Felice Serpico, sues to recover for personal injuries arising out of the aforesaid February 3, 1986 accident. In opposition to a motion by plaintiff for relief not relevant hereto, defendants Leslie and Serpico cross-moved for a summary judgment dismissal of the complaint and all cross-claims against them or, alternatively, inter alia, to preclude Stokes from testifying because of his failure to appear for deposition. In support of their cross-motion, defendants submitted an excerpt from Serpico's deposition in which he testified that he had been proceeding southbound on Second Avenue at about ten miles per hour in heavy traffic when a van in front of him slowed up and stopped; that he brought his Volvo to a complete stop approximately five feet behind the van; that his vehicle had been stopped for approximately three to five seconds and "all of a sudden I got banged in the rear." According to Serpico, he spoke to the driver (Stokes) of the white limousine that had struck his vehicle, who told him, "Well, I was making a right turn from Second Avenue and I seen the police barricade up, so I aborted the turn and I didn't know you were stopped and I turned around to answer to my passenger." In Serpico's MV-104, submitted on the motion with a New York City Police Department accident report, he gave the same account of the accident as he did at his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Burgos v. 205 E.D. Food Corp., Index No: 15760/06
...creating an issue of fact sufficient to preclude summary judgment. Johnson v. Phillips, 161 A.D.2d 269 (1st Dept. 1999); Rue v. Stokes, 191 A.D.2d 245 (1st Dept. 1993). Once movant meets his initial burden, the burden shifts to the opponent, who must then produce sufficient evidence, also i......
-
D'Amato v. Cantone
...of the accident (Bendik v Dybowski, 227 A.D.2d 228, 231-232, 642 N.Y.S.2d 284 [1996], in dissent, citing Rue v Stokes, 191 A.D.2d 245, 594 N.Y.S.2d 749 Here, the plaintiff has established her prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. The defendant was then required to proffer ......
-
D'Amato v. Cantone
...of the accident (Bendik v Dybowski, 227 A.D.2d 228, 231-232, 642 N.Y.S.2d 284 [1996], in dissent, citing Rue v Stokes, 191 A.D.2d 245, 594 N.Y.S.2d 749 Here, the plaintiff has established her prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. The defendant was then required to proffer ......
-
Davoli v. Meade
...same account of the accident (Bendik v. Dybowski, 227 A.D.2d 228, 231-232, 642 N.Y.S.2d 284 [1996], in . dissent, citing Rue v. Stokes, 191 A.D.2d 245; 594 N.Y.S.2d 749 [1993]). Here, the plaintiff has established her prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. The defendant was......