Polen v. Fuchs

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Polen v. Fuchs

203 A.D.2d 977, 612 N.Y.S.2d 1004

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

DecidedApril 15, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 203 A.D.2d 977 (Polen v. Fuchs) 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

Polen v. Fuchs, 203 A.D.2d 977, 612 N.Y.S.2d 1004 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motions denied, and complaint and cross claims reinstated. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting defendants’ motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and cross claims. Plaintiff raised questions of fact whether defendants breached duties of care owing to him (see, Basso v Miller, 40 NY2d 233, 241; Meseck v General Elec. Co., 195 AD2d 798; cf., Csukardi v Bishop McDonnell Camp, 148 AD2d 657). Defendants Fuchs and Southwell contend that, even if they could be found negligent, plaintiff’s act of walking backward while viewing the boat was a superseding cause of his injury. We disagree. At most, that conduct would constitute comparative negligence (see, e.g, Saldarriaga v DeSantis Bros., 151 AD2d 270, lv denied 74 NY2d 613). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Suffolk County, Cohalan, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Denman, P. J., Pine, Lawton, Callahan and Davis, JJ.

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

—Judgment unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motions denied, and complaint and cross claims reinstated. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting defendants’ motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and cross claims. Plaintiff raised questions of fact whether defendants breached duties of care owing to him (see, Basso v Miller, 40 NY2d 233, 241; Meseck v General Elec. Co., 195 AD2d 798; cf., Csukardi v Bishop McDonnell Camp, 148 AD2d 657). Defendants Fuchs and Southwell contend that, even if they could be found negligent, plaintiff’s act of walking backward while viewing the boat was a superseding cause of his injury. We disagree. At most, that conduct would constitute comparative negligence (see, e.g, Saldarriaga v DeSantis Bros., 151 AD2d 270, lv denied 74 NY2d 613). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Suffolk County, Cohalan, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Denman, P. J., Pine, Lawton, Callahan and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

203 A.D.2d 977, 612 N.Y.S.2d 1004, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/polen-v-fuchs-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack