Pianka v. Monahan

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Pianka v. Monahan

16 A.D.2d 833, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9464

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

DecidedMay 28, 1962

StatusPublished

This text of 16 A.D.2d 833 (Pianka v. Monahan) 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

Pianka v. Monahan, 16 A.D.2d 833, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9464 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for alleged injuries to person and property arising out of a rear-end automobile collision, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated November 23, 1960, which granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and directed an assessment of damages, pursuant to rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion for summary judgment denied. In view of the sharp dispute as to the force of the impact; as to the alleged injuries; and as to whether there were1 any injuries at all, there should be a plenary trial of the entire case so that it may he determined whether the claimed injuries could and did result from [834]*834the accident (Chmela v. Vought, 15 A D 2d 812, and cases cited). Beldock, P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Rabin, 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 alleged injuries to person and property arising out of a rear-end automobile collision, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated November 23, 1960, which granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and directed an assessment of damages, pursuant to rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice. Order reversed, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion for summary judgment denied. In view of the sharp dispute as to the force of the impact; as to the alleged injuries; and as to whether there were1 any injuries at all, there should be a plenary trial of the entire case so that it may he determined whether the claimed injuries could and did result from [834]*834the accident (Chmela v. Vought, 15 A D 2d 812, and cases cited). Beldock, P. J., Kleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Rabin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 A.D.2d 833, 1962 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9464, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pianka-v-monahan-nyappdiv-1962.