MacIntosh v. August Ambulette Service, Inc.

271 A.D.2d 661, 706 N.Y.S.2d 187, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4545
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 24, 2000
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 271 A.D.2d 661 (MacIntosh v. August Ambulette Service, Inc.) 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
MacIntosh v. August Ambulette Service, Inc., 271 A.D.2d 661, 706 N.Y.S.2d 187, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4545 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Opinion

—In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rappaport, J.), dated June 30, 1999, which granted the plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff was a passenger in the back of an ambulance owned and maintained by the defendant August Ambulette Service, Inc., and operated by the defendant Freddie A. Melendez. She was injured when the ambulance slid off the road and hit a tree and fire hydrant. There were no other vehicles involved in the accident. In support of her motion for summary judgment, the plaintiff submitted a copy of the Police Accident Report upon the incident which included Melendez’s statement that he “lost control in the snow”. The plaintiff also included a copy of Melendez’s “MV-104” report to the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles, in which Melendez stated the “vehicle didn’t have good tires to support the braking of the brakes” and that although he tried to brake, “still the vehicle kept sliding from side to side”. Since the defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact, the Supreme Court properly granted the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability (see, Siegel v Terrusa, 222 AD2d 428; deVoil v Wallace, 221 AD2d 411). Joy, J. P., Thompson, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Mughal v. Rajput
106 A.D.3d 886 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Pandey v. Parikh
57 A.D.3d 634 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Felberbaum v. Weinberger
40 A.D.3d 808 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Simmons v. Weegar
292 A.D.2d 828 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
271 A.D.2d 661, 706 N.Y.S.2d 187, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4545, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/macintosh-v-august-ambulette-service-inc-nyappdiv-2000.