Pfeiffer v. Hoye

198 A.D.2d 405, 605 N.Y.S.2d 903, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10912

Opinion

—In three related actions to recover damages for personal injuries, which were to be jointly tried, William Hitter, a defendant in two of the actions, appeals for so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Jones, J.), entered November 1, 1991, as denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing all claims against him.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

Contrary to the contentions of the appellant, the Supreme Court correctly concluded that there were triable issues of fact as to the occurrence of the accident and whether the appellant was free from negligence (see, CPLR 3212 [b]; Rotuba Extruders v Ceppos, 46 NY2d 223; Crowley v Acampora, 144 AD2d 330). Bracken, J. P., Balletta, Miller and Pizzuto, JJ., concur.

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

Pfeiffer v. Hoye, 198 A.D.2d 405, 605 N.Y.S.2d 903, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10912 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

198 A.D.2d 405 (Pfeiffer v. Hoye) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Rotuba Extruders, Inc. v. Ceppos
385 N.E.2d 1068 (New York Court of Appeals, 1978)
Crowley v. Acampora
144 A.D.2d 330 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)