Greenberg v. Parbury
This text of 251 A.D.2d 454 (Greenberg v. Parbury) 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.
Opinion
—In two related actions to recover damages, inter alia, for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Stark, J.), dated July 16, 1997, which denied their motion, among other things, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint in both actions.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
[455]*455This action arose from a motor vehicle accident involving a vehicle owned by Ellen J. Greenberg and Stephen R. Green-berg, the plaintiffs in Action No. 1, and a vehicle owned by the appellant Aaron Todd Boat Shipping, Inc., and operated by the appellant Philip E. Parbury, who are the defendants in both actions. The appellants’ claim that the plaintiffs are required to exhaust collateral resources, such as insurance, before prosecuting an action against the appellants, is without merit. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the appellants’ motion, inter alia, for summary judgment (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, .49 NY2d 557, 562). Rosenblatt, J. P., Copertino, Goldstein and Luciano, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
251 A.D.2d 454, 673 N.Y.S.2d 333, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/greenberg-v-parbury-nyappdiv-1998.