Bellavia v. Greenough

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bellavia v. Greenough

193 A.D.2d 712, 598 N.Y.S.2d 73, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4927

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

DecidedMay 17, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 193 A.D.2d 712 (Bellavia v. Greenough) 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

Bellavia v. Greenough, 193 A.D.2d 712, 598 N.Y.S.2d 73, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4927 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated April 18, 1991, which granted the motion of the respondents Willis Crawford, Robert A. Woodcock, and Marietta O’Keefe for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the respondents’ motion is denied, and the complaint as asserted against the respondents is reinstated.

The plaintiff Jacqueline Bellavia was injured in an automobile accident. Given the conflicting versions of which vehicle crossed the center line of the road, thus causing the accident, and the issue of the credibility of the witnesses, the Supreme Court erred in granting summary judgment to the respondents (see, Glick & Dolleck v Tri-Pac Export Corp., 22 NY2d 439). Bracken, J. P., Balletta, Eiber, O’Brien and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated April 18, 1991, which granted the motion of the respondents Willis Crawford, Robert A. Woodcock, and Marietta O’Keefe for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the respondents’ motion is denied, and the complaint as asserted against the respondents is reinstated.

The plaintiff Jacqueline Bellavia was injured in an automobile accident. Given the conflicting versions of which vehicle crossed the center line of the road, thus causing the accident, and the issue of the credibility of the witnesses, the Supreme Court erred in granting summary judgment to the respondents (see, Glick & Dolleck v Tri-Pac Export Corp., 22 NY2d 439). Bracken, J. P., Balletta, Eiber, O’Brien and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

193 A.D.2d 712, 598 N.Y.S.2d 73, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4927, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bellavia-v-greenough-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack