Grant v. Toyota

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Grant v. Toyota

224 A.D.2d 187, 637 N.Y.S.2d 932, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 787

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

DecidedFebruary 1, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 224 A.D.2d 187 (Grant v. Toyota) 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

Grant v. Toyota, 224 A.D.2d 187, 637 N.Y.S.2d 932, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 787 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan Saks, J.), entered July 13,1995, which, inter alia, denied defendant Presmont’s motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 and 3212, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The complaint sufficiently states a cause of action against defendant Presmont for negligent maintenance of the offending vehicle. Denial of summary judgment was also proper since defendant failed to establish her defenses to the action as a matter of law by tender of evidentiary proof in admissible form (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562). Moreover, plaintiffs, with the aid of discovery, may be able to establish defendant-appellant rented the vehicle for a sufficient period of time to be deemed an "owner” under Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 128 and 388 (3). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Kupferman, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan Saks, J.), entered July 13,1995, which, inter alia, denied defendant Presmont’s motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 and 3212, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The complaint sufficiently states a cause of action against defendant Presmont for negligent maintenance of the offending vehicle. Denial of summary judgment was also proper since defendant failed to establish her defenses to the action as a matter of law by tender of evidentiary proof in admissible form (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562). Moreover, plaintiffs, with the aid of discovery, may be able to establish defendant-appellant rented the vehicle for a sufficient period of time to be deemed an "owner” under Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 128 and 388 (3). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Ellerin, Kupferman, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

224 A.D.2d 187, 637 N.Y.S.2d 932, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 787, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grant-v-toyota-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack