Jakabovics v. Rosenberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jakabovics v. Rosenberg

49 A.D.3d 695, 853 N.Y.2d 643

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

DecidedMarch 18, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 49 A.D.3d 695 (Jakabovics v. Rosenberg) 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

Jakabovics v. Rosenberg, 49 A.D.3d 695, 853 N.Y.2d 643 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

[696]*696The infant plaintiff sustained personal injuries when he was struck by the defendant’s motor vehicle when the defendant was backing out of his driveway. After commencing this action, the plaintiff mother of the infant plaintiff moved, on their behalf, inter alia, for summary judgment on the issue of liability. The evidence submitted in support of the motion, consisting, inter alia, of the defendant’s deposition testimony in which he testified that he was proceeding at less than five miles per hour, looking in all of the car’s mirrors and looking backward, as he backed the vehicle out of the driveway, failed to establish a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]). “Failure to make such prima facie showing requires a denial” of that branch of the motion which was for summary judgment on the issue of liability, “regardless of the sufficiency of the opposing papers” (id. at 324). Fisher, J.P., Miller, McCarthy and Chambers, JJ., concur.

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

[696]*696The infant plaintiff sustained personal injuries when he was struck by the defendant’s motor vehicle when the defendant was backing out of his driveway. After commencing this action, the plaintiff mother of the infant plaintiff moved, on their behalf, inter alia, for summary judgment on the issue of liability. The evidence submitted in support of the motion, consisting, inter alia, of the defendant’s deposition testimony in which he testified that he was proceeding at less than five miles per hour, looking in all of the car’s mirrors and looking backward, as he backed the vehicle out of the driveway, failed to establish a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]). “Failure to make such prima facie showing requires a denial” of that branch of the motion which was for summary judgment on the issue of liability, “regardless of the sufficiency of the opposing papers” (id. at 324). Fisher, J.P., Miller, McCarthy and Chambers, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

49 A.D.3d 695, 853 N.Y.2d 643, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jakabovics-v-rosenberg-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack