Friedburg v. P. & H. Service Station, Inc.

13 A.D.2d 503, 211 N.Y.S.2d 883, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12330
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 6, 1961
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 13 A.D.2d 503 (Friedburg v. P. & H. Service Station, 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
Friedburg v. P. & H. Service Station, Inc., 13 A.D.2d 503, 211 N.Y.S.2d 883, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12330 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1961).

Opinion

In an automobile negligence action by plaintiff wife to recover damages for personal injuries and by her husband for medical expenses and loss of services, defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated September 19, 1960, granting plaintiffs’ motion, pursuant to rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice, for summary judgment. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. On the undisputed evidence it appears that the automobile operated by the female plaintiff was proceeding at a speed of about 25 miles an hour toward an intersection controlled by a traffic signal light. At a distance of at least 35 or 40 feet from the intersection, she applied her brakes in obedience to an amber traffic signal and brought her automobile to a stop at the intersection. The collision occurred because defendant Di Meo, operating a truck owned by the defendant corporation, when he was about two car lengths behind plaintiffs’ automobile, “more or less figured she was going to ° * * cross the light”, and did not apply the truck’s brakes until plaintiffs’ automobile had stopped. We are [504]*504in agreement with the Special Term that under the circumstances the defendant Di Meo was guilty of negligence as a matter of law; that his negligence was the sole proximate cause of the accident; and that there was no question of fact which required a trial. Nolan, P., J., Beldoek, Ughetta, Kleinfeld and Pette, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Conyers v. Vinti
107 A.D.2d 787 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1985)
Silver v. Elaine Products Co., Inc.
50 A.D.2d 916 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1975)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
13 A.D.2d 503, 211 N.Y.S.2d 883, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12330, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/friedburg-v-p-h-service-station-inc-nyappdiv-1961.