Disher v. Ahern

294 A.D.2d 393, 741 N.Y.S.2d 739, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4977
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 13, 2002
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 294 A.D.2d 393 (Disher v. Ahern) 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
Disher v. Ahern, 294 A.D.2d 393, 741 N.Y.S.2d 739, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4977 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Hillery, J.), dated February 5, 2001, which granted the motion of the plaintiff Monika J. Disher for summary judgment dismissing the defendants’ counterclaims and granted the separate motion of the plaintiffs for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability and to dismiss the defendants’ second affirmative defense alleging comparative negligence.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs demonstrated prima facie that the defendant Eric S. Ahern was negligent as a matter of law for proceeding into an intersection governed by a stop sign without yielding to the vehicle operated by the plaintiff Monika J. Disher, which had the right of way (see Wolfson v Milillo, 262 AD2d 636, 637; Ponticello v Wilhelm, 249 AD2d 459). In opposition, the defendants failed to demonstrate the existence of any triable issue of fact (see Gilbert Frank Corp. v Federal Ins. Co., 70 NY2d 966, 968; Agin v Rehfeldt, 284 AD2d 352; Cascio v Scigiano, 262 AD2d 264; Bolta v Lohan, 242 AD2d 356; Nunziata v Birchell, 238 AD2d 555).

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted partial summary judgment on the issue of liability to the plaintiffs, and properly dismissed the defendants’ counterclaims against Monika J. Disher and second affirmative defense alleging comparative negligence (see Wolfson v Milillo, supra; Ponticello v Wilhelm, supra). Ritter, J.P., Feuerstein, Goldstein and Cozier, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Mizrahi v. Ping Lam
40 A.D.3d 594 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Morgan v. Hachmann
9 A.D.3d 400 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Klein v. Byalik
1 A.D.2d 399 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Wilkins v. Davis
305 A.D.2d 584 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Driscoll v. Casey
299 A.D.2d 885 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Gillinder v. Hemmes
298 A.D.2d 493 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
294 A.D.2d 393, 741 N.Y.S.2d 739, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4977, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/disher-v-ahern-nyappdiv-2002.