Rubin v. Andino

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rubin v. Andino

11 A.D.2d 663, 201 N.Y.S.2d 567, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9062

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

DecidedJune 21, 1960

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 11 A.D.2d 663 (Rubin v. Andino) 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

Rubin v. Andino, 11 A.D.2d 663, 201 N.Y.S.2d 567, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9062 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinions

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered December 17, 1959, in Bronx County, which granted a motion by plaintiffs for summary judgment under rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice and directed an assessment of damages.

Memorandum by the Court. Order dated December 17, 1959, granting plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment reversed on the law and on the facts, with $20 costs and disbursements to defendant-appellant, and the motion denied, with $10 costs. Despite plaintiffs’ claim of injuries, issues of fact are raised with respect to whether plaintiffs sustained any injuries or suffered any property damage, or whether they were suffered as a result of the alleged accident. Even the papers in support of plaintiffs’ motion indicate the existence of a question of fact. “ Consequently the court does not reach the question whether issues of liability otherwise satisfy the rule in Di Sabato v. Soffes (9 A D 2d 297) (Ruppert v. Building Materials Dist., 10 A D 2d 621.)

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

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered December 17, 1959, in Bronx County, which granted a motion by plaintiffs for summary judgment under rule 113 of the Rules of Civil Practice and directed an assessment of damages.

Memorandum by the Court. Order dated December 17, 1959, granting plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment reversed on the law and on the facts, with $20 costs and disbursements to defendant-appellant, and the motion denied, with $10 costs. Despite plaintiffs’ claim of injuries, issues of fact are raised with respect to whether plaintiffs sustained any injuries or suffered any property damage, or whether they were suffered as a result of the alleged accident. Even the papers in support of plaintiffs’ motion indicate the existence of a question of fact. “ Consequently the court does not reach the question whether issues of liability otherwise satisfy the rule in Di Sabato v. Soffes (9 A D 2d 297) (Ruppert v. Building Materials Dist., 10 A D 2d 621.)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 A.D.2d 663, 201 N.Y.S.2d 567, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9062, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rubin-v-andino-nyappdiv-1960.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack