D'Alessandro v. Eastman Kodak Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

D'Alessandro v. Eastman Kodak Co.

256 A.D.2d 1242, 684 N.Y.S.2d 91, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14439

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

DecidedDecember 31, 1998

DocketAppeal No. 2

StatusPublished

This text of 256 A.D.2d 1242 (D'Alessandro v. Eastman Kodak Co.) 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

D'Alessandro v. Eastman Kodak Co., 256 A.D.2d 1242, 684 N.Y.S.2d 91, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14439 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion denied and complaint against defendant Frank Mongeon, Jr., reinstated. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting the motion of Frank Mongeon, Jr. (defendant) for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against him in action No. 5. Defendant met his initial burden by submitting evidentiary proof that the Eastman Kodak Company (Kodak) dump truck that he was driving was not involved in the accident that resulted in the death of plaintiffs decedent. Defendant submitted proof that he had not yet left the sand and gravel company when two other Kodak dump trucks were at the scene of an accident on Scottsville Road. Plaintiff, however, came forward with evidentiary proof in admissible form that a witness who knew defendant identified him as the driver of one of the two Kodak trucks at the scene. Plaintiff thereby raised issues of fact whether defendant was a driver involved in the accident and, if so, whether he was negligent (see generally, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Fisher, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present— Green, J. P., Pine, Wisner, Callahan and Boehm, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion denied and complaint against defendant Frank Mongeon, Jr., reinstated. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting the motion of Frank Mongeon, Jr. (defendant) for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against him in action No. 5. Defendant met his initial burden by submitting evidentiary proof that the Eastman Kodak Company (Kodak) dump truck that he was driving was not involved in the accident that resulted in the death of plaintiffs decedent. Defendant submitted proof that he had not yet left the sand and gravel company when two other Kodak dump trucks were at the scene of an accident on Scottsville Road. Plaintiff, however, came forward with evidentiary proof in admissible form that a witness who knew defendant identified him as the driver of one of the two Kodak trucks at the scene. Plaintiff thereby raised issues of fact whether defendant was a driver involved in the accident and, if so, whether he was negligent (see generally, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Fisher, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present— Green, J. P., Pine, Wisner, Callahan and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

256 A.D.2d 1242, 684 N.Y.S.2d 91, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14439, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dalessandro-v-eastman-kodak-co-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack