Alami v. Volkswagen of America, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Alami v. Volkswagen of America, Inc.

278 A.D.2d 262, 718 N.Y.S.2d 604, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14116

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 11, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 278 A.D.2d 262 (Alami v. Volkswagen of America, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Alami v. Volkswagen of America, Inc., 278 A.D.2d 262, 718 N.Y.S.2d 604, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14116 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for wrongful death, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Fredman, J.), dated May 21, 1999, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In support of its motion for summary judgment, the defendant submitted evidence establishing that the plaintiff’s decedent was highly intoxicated when he lost control of his vehicle and crashed into a utility pole. Under the circumstances of this case, the negligent manner in which the decedent was operating his vehicle was the sole proximate cause of the collision and his fatal injuries (see, Montero v Muller, 269 AD2d 576; Shevalier v Bentley, 268 AD2d 622; Hyland v Calace, 244 AD2d 318). The plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact.

In view of our determination, we need not reach the defendant’s remaining contention. O’Brien, J. P., Altman, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for wrongful death, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Fredman, J.), dated May 21, 1999, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In support of its motion for summary judgment, the defendant submitted evidence establishing that the plaintiff’s decedent was highly intoxicated when he lost control of his vehicle and crashed into a utility pole. Under the circumstances of this case, the negligent manner in which the decedent was operating his vehicle was the sole proximate cause of the collision and his fatal injuries (see, Montero v Muller, 269 AD2d 576; Shevalier v Bentley, 268 AD2d 622; Hyland v Calace, 244 AD2d 318). The plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact.

In view of our determination, we need not reach the defendant’s remaining contention. O’Brien, J. P., Altman, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

278 A.D.2d 262, 718 N.Y.S.2d 604, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14116, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alami-v-volkswagen-of-america-inc-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack