De Preter v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

De Preter v. City of New York

219 A.D.2d 561, 631 N.Y.S.2d 351, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9618

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

DecidedSeptember 28, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 219 A.D.2d 561 (De Preter v. City of New York) 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

De Preter v. City of New York, 219 A.D.2d 561, 631 N.Y.S.2d 351, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9618 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter Tolub, J.), entered October 13, 1994, which denied plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Triable issues of fact preclude summary judgment, including whether the allegedly defective playground equipment with the protruding metal bolt was the proximate cause of plaintiff infant’s injury. The infant’s father states that he heard the infant screaming and turned immediately to see her standing next to the playground equipment with blood streaming down her face. He does not claim to have actually witnessed the accident, and even if he did so claim, the issue of credibility presented would render summary judgment inappropriate (see, Capelin Assocs. v Globe Mfg. Corp., 34 NY2d 338, 341). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Asch, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter Tolub, J.), entered October 13, 1994, which denied plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Triable issues of fact preclude summary judgment, including whether the allegedly defective playground equipment with the protruding metal bolt was the proximate cause of plaintiff infant’s injury. The infant’s father states that he heard the infant screaming and turned immediately to see her standing next to the playground equipment with blood streaming down her face. He does not claim to have actually witnessed the accident, and even if he did so claim, the issue of credibility presented would render summary judgment inappropriate (see, Capelin Assocs. v Globe Mfg. Corp., 34 NY2d 338, 341). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Asch, Williams and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

219 A.D.2d 561, 631 N.Y.S.2d 351, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9618, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/de-preter-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack