Agostino v. Pennysaver Group, Inc.

284 A.D.2d 353, 725 N.Y.S.2d 900, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6048
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 11, 2001·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Cowhey, J.), dated September 7, 2000, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant established its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. In opposing the defendant’s motion, the plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact as to whether the defendant’s employee was acting within the scope of employment when the employee’s vehicle struck her (see, Lundberg v State of New York, 25 NY2d 467; Donitz v Mui, 247 AD2d 508; Howard v Hilton, 244 AD2d 912; Casimiro v Thayer, 229 AD2d 958). O’Brien, J. P., Krausman, Goldstein and Crane, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Agostino v. Pennysaver Group, Inc., 284 A.D.2d 353, 725 N.Y.S.2d 900, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6048 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

284 A.D.2d 353 (Agostino v. Pennysaver Group, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Beres v. Terranera
2017 NY Slip Op 5929 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Fenster v. Ellis
71 A.D.3d 1079 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Xin Tang Wu v. Ng
70 A.D.3d 818 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Schilt v. New York City Transit Authority
304 A.D.2d 189 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)