Marinelli v. Houseman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Marinelli v. Houseman

280 A.D.2d 997, 720 N.Y.S.2d 427, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1174

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

DecidedFebruary 7, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 280 A.D.2d 997 (Marinelli v. Houseman) 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

Marinelli v. Houseman, 280 A.D.2d 997, 720 N.Y.S.2d 427, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1174 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Defendant Bonnie J. Houseman moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and cross claims against her on the ground that the conduct of defendant Robert A. Hagan in pulling his vehicle in front of her vehicle was the sole proximate cause of the collision. Supreme Court properly denied the motion. Whether Houseman encountered an emergency situation and acted reasonably when faced with that emergency is an issue of fact for the jury (see, Ferrer v Harris, 55 NY2d 285, 292-293, mot to amend remittitur granted 56 NY2d 737; Roantree v Kurre, 255 AD2d 433). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Flaherty, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Green, Hayes, Burns and Lawton, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Defendant Bonnie J. Houseman moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and cross claims against her on the ground that the conduct of defendant Robert A. Hagan in pulling his vehicle in front of her vehicle was the sole proximate cause of the collision. Supreme Court properly denied the motion. Whether Houseman encountered an emergency situation and acted reasonably when faced with that emergency is an issue of fact for the jury (see, Ferrer v Harris, 55 NY2d 285, 292-293, mot to amend remittitur granted 56 NY2d 737; Roantree v Kurre, 255 AD2d 433). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Flaherty, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Green, Hayes, Burns and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

280 A.D.2d 997, 720 N.Y.S.2d 427, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1174, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marinelli-v-houseman-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack