Maynard v. Vandyke
This text of 69 A.D.3d 515 (Maynard v. Vandyke) 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.
Opinion
Plaintiffs vehicle, while stopped at a traffic light, was struck in the rear by defendant’s vehicle. In opposition to plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, defendant failed to raise a question of fact as to whether there was a nonnegligent reason for the collision (see Mullen v Rigor, 8 AD3d 104 [2004]). Since defendant herself would be the party with knowledge of any such nonnegligent reasons, it does not avail her that her counsel had not yet received plaintiffs bill of particulars setting forth his claims in detail (Soto-Maroquin v Mellet, 63 AD3d 449 [2009]). Concur—Tom, J.E, Saxe, Nardelli, Renwick and Freedman, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
69 A.D.3d 515, 893 N.Y.2d 53, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/maynard-v-vandyke-nyappdiv-2010.