Passamondi v. Hunt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Passamondi v. Hunt

80 A.D.2d 889

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

DecidedMarch 16, 1981

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 80 A.D.2d 889 (Passamondi v. Hunt) 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

Passamondi v. Hunt, 80 A.D.2d 889 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., plaintiffs Steve D. Passamondi and Linda Passamondi appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Putnam County, entered May 12, 1980, which, after a jury trial limited to the issue of liability, was in favor of defendants Hunt. Judgment affirmed, with costs. The single alleged error in the trial court’s instruction preserved for review concerns the court’s refusal to instruct the jury regarding the duty of care imposed by section 1143 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law upon the driver of a vehicle exiting from a driveway. As the undisputed testimony at trial established that the vehicle operated by Douglas Hunt had already left the driveway before he could possibly have been aware of plaintiffs’ oncoming automobile, section 1143 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law was inapplicable and the trial court correctly declined to so charge. Titone, J. P., Rabin, Margett and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

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

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., plaintiffs Steve D. Passamondi and Linda Passamondi appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Putnam County, entered May 12, 1980, which, after a jury trial limited to the issue of liability, was in favor of defendants Hunt. Judgment affirmed, with costs. The single alleged error in the trial court’s instruction preserved for review concerns the court’s refusal to instruct the jury regarding the duty of care imposed by section 1143 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law upon the driver of a vehicle exiting from a driveway. As the undisputed testimony at trial established that the vehicle operated by Douglas Hunt had already left the driveway before he could possibly have been aware of plaintiffs’ oncoming automobile, section 1143 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law was inapplicable and the trial court correctly declined to so charge. Titone, J. P., Rabin, Margett and Weinstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

80 A.D.2d 889, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/passamondi-v-hunt-nyappdiv-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack