Greenberg v. Green

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Greenberg v. Green

197 A.D.2d 502, 604 N.Y.S.2d 743, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8950

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 4, 1993·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs Marilyn and David Greenberg appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Brown, J.), dated July 10, 1991, which granted the motion of the defendants Donald Grodsky and Richard Leland for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion for summary judgment is denied.

It is well settled that negligence cases do not generally lend themselves to resolution by summary judgment (see, Ugarriza v Schemieder, 46 NY2d 471; Chahales v Garber, 195 AD2d 585), and determinations as to credibility should be left for trial. In this case, we find that the court erred in granting the respondents’ motion for summary judgment, as there were triable issues of fact (see, Kosan v County of Westchester, 162 AD2d 592). Mangano, P. J., Rosenblatt, Lawrence, Copertino and Joy, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs Marilyn and David Greenberg appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Brown, J.), dated July 10, 1991, which granted the motion of the defendants Donald Grodsky and Richard Leland for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion for summary judgment is denied.

It is well settled that negligence cases do not generally lend themselves to resolution by summary judgment (see, Ugarriza v Schemieder, 46 NY2d 471; Chahales v Garber, 195 AD2d 585), and determinations as to credibility should be left for trial. In this case, we find that the court erred in granting the respondents’ motion for summary judgment, as there were triable issues of fact (see, Kosan v County of Westchester, 162 AD2d 592). Mangano, P. J., Rosenblatt, Lawrence, Copertino and Joy, JJ., concur.

Greenberg v. Green, 197 A.D.2d 502, 604 N.Y.S.2d 743, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8950 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

197 A.D.2d 502 (Greenberg v. Green) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related