Matzinger v. Van Matre

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Matzinger v. Van Matre

151 A.D.2d 555, 543 N.Y.S.2d 918, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7996

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

DecidedJune 12, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 151 A.D.2d 555 (Matzinger v. Van Matre) 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

Matzinger v. Van Matre, 151 A.D.2d 555, 543 N.Y.S.2d 918, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7996 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant John P. McNerney appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Morrison, J.), dated March 22, 1988, as denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against him and any cross claims against him.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to the plaintiff.

The record reveals material triable issues with regard to the operation of the defendant McNerney’s vehicle, and with regard to the circumstances preceding and occurring at the time of the accident, so as to preclude the granting of summary judgment to that defendant. Kooper, J. P., Spatt, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant John P. McNerney appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Morrison, J.), dated March 22, 1988, as denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against him and any cross claims against him.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs to the plaintiff.

The record reveals material triable issues with regard to the operation of the defendant McNerney’s vehicle, and with regard to the circumstances preceding and occurring at the time of the accident, so as to preclude the granting of summary judgment to that defendant. Kooper, J. P., Spatt, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

151 A.D.2d 555, 543 N.Y.S.2d 918, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7996, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matzinger-v-van-matre-nyappdiv-1989.