Cicero v. Clark

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Cicero v. Clark

23 A.D.2d 583, 256 N.Y.S.2d 705, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4801

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 23, 1965·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

In a negligence action arising from a collision between two automobiles, the defendants appeal: (1) from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated September 9, 1964, which granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and directed an assessment of damages; and (2) from an order of said court, made September 10, 1964 upon reargument, which again granted the motion. Appeal from order of September 9, 1964 dismissed, without costs as academic; such order was superseded by the later order of September 10, 1964, made upon reargument. Order of September 10, 1964 reversed, without costs, and plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment denied. In our opinion, on this record triable issues of fact exist: (a) as to the alleged negligence of the defendant in falling asleep at the wheel of the automobile while driving {Smith V. McIntyre, 20 A D 2d 711; Donahue v. Bomahn, 10 A D 2d 637); ,and (b) as to the contributory negligence of the plaintiff {Vignola v. Britts, 11 A D 2d 801). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Brennan, Hill and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

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

In a negligence action arising from a collision between two automobiles, the defendants appeal: (1) from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated September 9, 1964, which granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and directed an assessment of damages; and (2) from an order of said court, made September 10, 1964 upon reargument, which again granted the motion. Appeal from order of September 9, 1964 dismissed, without costs as academic; such order was superseded by the later order of September 10, 1964, made upon reargument. Order of September 10, 1964 reversed, without costs, and plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment denied. In our opinion, on this record triable issues of fact exist: (a) as to the alleged negligence of the defendant in falling asleep at the wheel of the automobile while driving {Smith V. McIntyre, 20 A D 2d 711; Donahue v. Bomahn, 10 A D 2d 637); ,and (b) as to the contributory negligence of the plaintiff {Vignola v. Britts, 11 A D 2d 801). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Brennan, Hill and Hopkins, JJ., concur.

Cicero v. Clark, 23 A.D.2d 583, 256 N.Y.S.2d 705, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4801 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

23 A.D.2d 583 (Cicero v. Clark) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related