Bushey v. Restaurant Associates, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bushey v. Restaurant Associates, Inc.

260 A.D.2d 326, 690 N.Y.S.2d 186, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4352

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

DecidedApril 29, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 260 A.D.2d 326 (Bushey v. Restaurant Associates, 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

Bushey v. Restaurant Associates, Inc., 260 A.D.2d 326, 690 N.Y.S.2d 186, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4352 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Elliott Wilk, J.), entered on or about June 2, 1998, which denied defendant-appellant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Triable issues of fact exist, including whether the driver of the cart that struck plaintiff was appellant’s employee, and, if that is not the case, whether appellant exercised sufficient control over the cart to warrant the imposition of liability (see, Ahmad v Ennab, 158 AD2d 637). This latter issue is raised by the testimony that carts like the one in question were freely given out by appellant to its subcontractors based on availability. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Andrias, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Elliott Wilk, J.), entered on or about June 2, 1998, which denied defendant-appellant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Triable issues of fact exist, including whether the driver of the cart that struck plaintiff was appellant’s employee, and, if that is not the case, whether appellant exercised sufficient control over the cart to warrant the imposition of liability (see, Ahmad v Ennab, 158 AD2d 637). This latter issue is raised by the testimony that carts like the one in question were freely given out by appellant to its subcontractors based on availability. Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Andrias, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

260 A.D.2d 326, 690 N.Y.S.2d 186, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4352, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bushey-v-restaurant-associates-inc-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack