McCann v. Mahoney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

McCann v. Mahoney

214 A.D.2d 607, 624 N.Y.S.2d 963, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4100

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

DecidedApril 10, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 214 A.D.2d 607 (McCann v. Mahoney) 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

McCann v. Mahoney, 214 A.D.2d 607, 624 N.Y.S.2d 963, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4100 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Burke, J.), dated January 24, 1994, which denied their motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs’ motion as the defendant came forward with sufficient evidence of the plaintiff-driver’s negligence to raise an issue of fact regarding the comparative fault of the parties (see, Nitzke v Loveland, 188 AD2d 1058; compare, Crociata v Vasquez, 168 AD2d 410; Benjarko v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 162 AD2d 572). Balletta, J. P., Thompson, Santucci, Altman and Hart, 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, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Burke, J.), dated January 24, 1994, which denied their motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs’ motion as the defendant came forward with sufficient evidence of the plaintiff-driver’s negligence to raise an issue of fact regarding the comparative fault of the parties (see, Nitzke v Loveland, 188 AD2d 1058; compare, Crociata v Vasquez, 168 AD2d 410; Benjarko v Avis Rent A Car Sys., 162 AD2d 572). Balletta, J. P., Thompson, Santucci, Altman and Hart, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

214 A.D.2d 607, 624 N.Y.S.2d 963, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4100, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccann-v-mahoney-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack