O'Malley v. USA Waste of New York, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

O'Malley v. USA Waste of New York, Inc.

283 A.D.2d 409, 724 N.Y.S.2d 170, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4768

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

DecidedMay 7, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 283 A.D.2d 409 (O'Malley v. USA Waste of New York, Inc.) 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

O'Malley v. USA Waste of New York, Inc., 283 A.D.2d 409, 724 N.Y.S.2d 170, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4768 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gigante, J.), dated March 21, 2000, which granted the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff was injured as he stepped out of his double-parked vehicle. He was struck by the steel door of a container being transported on the defendants’ vehicle which had swung open as it was passing the plaintiffs vehicle. While negligence cases do not generally lend themselves to resolution by motion for summary judgment, such a motion should be granted where the facts clearly point to the negligence of one party without any fault or culpable conduct by the other party (see, Lazar v Fea Leasing, 264 AD2d 818). The evidence here clearly established that the defendants were negligent in failing to properly secure the steel door of the container. In addition, we reject the defendants’ contention that the plaintiffs double-parking of his vehicle caused or contributed to the accident. The presence of the plaintiffs vehicle at its location, albeit double-parked, merely furnished the condition or occasion for the occurrence rather than one of its causes (see, Sheehan v City of New York, 40 NY2d 496; Haylett v New York City Tr. Auth., 251 AD2d 373). Bracken, P. J., Friedmann, Florio, H. Miller and Townes, 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 defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Gigante, J.), dated March 21, 2000, which granted the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff was injured as he stepped out of his double-parked vehicle. He was struck by the steel door of a container being transported on the defendants’ vehicle which had swung open as it was passing the plaintiffs vehicle. While negligence cases do not generally lend themselves to resolution by motion for summary judgment, such a motion should be granted where the facts clearly point to the negligence of one party without any fault or culpable conduct by the other party (see, Lazar v Fea Leasing, 264 AD2d 818). The evidence here clearly established that the defendants were negligent in failing to properly secure the steel door of the container. In addition, we reject the defendants’ contention that the plaintiffs double-parking of his vehicle caused or contributed to the accident. The presence of the plaintiffs vehicle at its location, albeit double-parked, merely furnished the condition or occasion for the occurrence rather than one of its causes (see, Sheehan v City of New York, 40 NY2d 496; Haylett v New York City Tr. Auth., 251 AD2d 373). Bracken, P. J., Friedmann, Florio, H. Miller and Townes, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

283 A.D.2d 409, 724 N.Y.S.2d 170, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4768, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/omalley-v-usa-waste-of-new-york-inc-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack