Barnao v. Barnao

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Barnao v. Barnao

297 A.D.2d 618, 746 N.Y.2d 903, 746 N.Y.S.2d 903, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8296

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

DecidedSeptember 9, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 297 A.D.2d 618 (Barnao v. Barnao) 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

Barnao v. Barnao, 297 A.D.2d 618, 746 N.Y.2d 903, 746 N.Y.S.2d 903, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8296 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Summary judgment will only be granted if there is no triable issue of fact (see Sillman v Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 3 NY2d 395, 404; Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562; Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324). Although the plaintiff made out a prima facie case in her motion for summary judgment, the defendant established, in opposition thereto, that there are triable issues of fact as to whether she was negligent in the operation of her vehicle before it skidded off the roadway, and whether she was confronted with an emergency situation when her right rear tire became stuck in a groove in the roadway (see Malatesta v Hopf, 163 AD2d 651, affd 77 NY2d 828). O’Brien, J.P., Krausman, Schmidt and Cozier, JJ., concur.

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

Summary judgment will only be granted if there is no triable issue of fact (see Sillman v Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 3 NY2d 395, 404; Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562; Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324). Although the plaintiff made out a prima facie case in her motion for summary judgment, the defendant established, in opposition thereto, that there are triable issues of fact as to whether she was negligent in the operation of her vehicle before it skidded off the roadway, and whether she was confronted with an emergency situation when her right rear tire became stuck in a groove in the roadway (see Malatesta v Hopf, 163 AD2d 651, affd 77 NY2d 828). O’Brien, J.P., Krausman, Schmidt and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

297 A.D.2d 618, 746 N.Y.2d 903, 746 N.Y.S.2d 903, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8296, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barnao-v-barnao-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack