Geler v. Weitzman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Geler v. Weitzman

12 A.D.2d 947, 210 N.Y.S.2d 876, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12886

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

DecidedFebruary 6, 1961

StatusPublished

This text of 12 A.D.2d 947 (Geler v. Weitzman) 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

Geler v. Weitzman, 12 A.D.2d 947, 210 N.Y.S.2d 876, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12886 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action by an infant plaintiff to recover damages for personal injuries sustained as the result of the defendant’s negligent operation of his motor vehicle in which the infant was a passenger, and by her father for loss of services and expenses, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 21, 1960, granting plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment, pursuant to rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied. Whether the swerve or skid into the elevated pillar resulted from negligent operation was, at the least, a question of fact in view of the respective versions of the infant plaintiff and the defendant (Lahr v. Tirrill, 274 N. Y. 112; Cole v. Swagler, 308 N. Y. 325). Moreover, there is no showing of compensable injury sustained by the infant plaintiff as a result of the accident. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Ughetta, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.

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

In an action by an infant plaintiff to recover damages for personal injuries sustained as the result of the defendant’s negligent operation of his motor vehicle in which the infant was a passenger, and by her father for loss of services and expenses, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 21, 1960, granting plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment, pursuant to rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion denied. Whether the swerve or skid into the elevated pillar resulted from negligent operation was, at the least, a question of fact in view of the respective versions of the infant plaintiff and the defendant (Lahr v. Tirrill, 274 N. Y. 112; Cole v. Swagler, 308 N. Y. 325). Moreover, there is no showing of compensable injury sustained by the infant plaintiff as a result of the accident. Nolan, P. J., Beldock, Ughetta, Christ and Brennan, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 A.D.2d 947, 210 N.Y.S.2d 876, 1961 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12886, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/geler-v-weitzman-nyappdiv-1961.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack