Mary T. Heltz v. Bruce S. Barratt
This text of Mary T. Heltz v. Bruce S. Barratt (Mary T. Heltz v. Bruce S. Barratt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
================================================================= This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York Reports. ----------------------------------------------------------------- No. 237 SSM 28 Mary T. Heltz, Appellant, v. Bruce S. Barratt et al., Respondents.
Submitted by Scott R. Hapeman, for appellant. Submitted by Andrew J. Kowalewski, for respondents.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules, order affirmed, with costs. Plaintiff failed to produce admissible evidence raising a triable issue of fact concerning whether defendant Barratt had an opportunity to avoid the collision. Chief Judge Lippman and Judges Read, Smith, Pigott, Rivera and Abdus-Salaam concur.
Decided December 17, 2014
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Mary T. Heltz v. Bruce S. Barratt, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mary-t-heltz-v-bruce-s-barratt-ny-2014.