Gilberg v. Barbieri

74 A.D.2d 913, 426 N.Y.S.2d 72, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10719

This text of 74 A.D.2d 913 (Gilberg v. Barbieri) 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
Gilberg v. Barbieri, 74 A.D.2d 913, 426 N.Y.S.2d 72, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10719 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1980).

Opinions

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., arising out of an assault, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, dated July 13, 1979, which granted plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is based upon the doctrine of collateral estoppel. It is well established that to invoke collateral estoppel, " 'There must be [1] an identity of issue which has necessarily been decided in the prior action and is decisive of the present action, and [2] a full and fair opportunity to contest the decision now said to be controlling’ ” (S. T. Grand, Inc. v City of New York, 32 NY2d 300, 304; Schwartz v Public Administrator of County of Bronx, 24 NY2d 65, 71; Read v Sacco, 49 AD2d 471, 473). In the instant case, the record establishes that the facts upon which the defendant’s conviction for the violation of harassment rested are the identical facts which must be proved for plaintiff to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by an intentional assault. In addition, defendant was afforded a full and fair opportunity to contest the accusation of harassment at his trial. Under these circumstances, the conviction of harassment is conclusive proof of the defendant’s liability in the subsequent action to recover damages for intentional assault (see S. T. Grand, Inc. v City of New York, supra). Accordingly, his liability is established as a matter of law. Hopkins, J. P., Titone and Lazer, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Duncan v. Louisiana
391 U.S. 145 (Supreme Court, 1968)
Baldwin v. New York
399 U.S. 66 (Supreme Court, 1970)
Rembrandt Industries, Inc. v. Hodges International, Inc.
344 N.E.2d 383 (New York Court of Appeals, 1976)
Jones v. Young
257 A.D. 563 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1939)
Chaffee v. Lawrence
282 A.D. 875 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1953)
Schwartz v. Public Administrator
246 N.E.2d 725 (New York Court of Appeals, 1969)
S. T. Grand, Inc. v. City of New York
298 N.E.2d 105 (New York Court of Appeals, 1973)
Montalvo v. Morales
18 A.D.2d 20 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1963)
Read v. Sacco
49 A.D.2d 471 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1975)
Augustine v. Village of Interlaken
68 A.D.2d 705 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
74 A.D.2d 913, 426 N.Y.S.2d 72, 1980 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10719, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gilberg-v-barbieri-nyappdiv-1980.