Hill v. Luna
This text of 195 A.D.2d 1000 (Hill v. Luna) 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
Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted the motion of defendants Cronshaw for summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs’ complaint. Plaintiff Elizabeth Hill was injured while a passenger in an automobile driven by defendant Betty M. Cronshaw. Another motorist ran a red light and collided with the Cronshaw vehicle, which was proceeding through a green light at a speed of approximately 15 to 20 miles per hour. The Cronshaws established through the deposition testimony of Betty Cronshaw and Elizabeth Hill that the former "did all that a reasonable person would be expected to do under the circumstances” by proceeding with caution (Mansfield v Graff, 47 AD2d 581, 582; see also, Safran v Amato, 155 AD2d 653, 654). In response, plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see generally, Friends of Animals v Associated Fur Mfrs., 46 NY2d 1065). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Joslin, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Lawton, Boomer and Boehm, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
195 A.D.2d 1000, 600 N.Y.S.2d 563, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hill-v-luna-nyappdiv-1993.