Taub v. Clinton Taxi Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Taub v. Clinton Taxi Corp.

24 A.D.2d 716, 263 N.Y.S.2d 371, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3351

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

DecidedSeptember 30, 1965

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 24 A.D.2d 716 (Taub v. Clinton Taxi Corp.) 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

Taub v. Clinton Taxi Corp., 24 A.D.2d 716, 263 N.Y.S.2d 371, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3351 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, entered February 9, 1965, unanimously reversed, on the law, with $30 costs and disbursements, to appellants, and plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment denied. The plaintiff, moving for summary judgment in this action for personal injuries, grounded in negligence, was bound to present a proper factual showing of freedom from contributory negligence. There is no affidavit submitted by the plaintiff himself, and there is no proper showing of what he did in the alleged exercise of due care. Thus, the motion for summary judgment should have been denied. (OPLR 3212, subd. [b] ; 4 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, N. Y. Civ. Prae., par. 3212.03.) Concur — Botein, P. J., Rabin, Tálente, Stevens and Eager, JJ.

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

Order, entered February 9, 1965, unanimously reversed, on the law, with $30 costs and disbursements, to appellants, and plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment denied. The plaintiff, moving for summary judgment in this action for personal injuries, grounded in negligence, was bound to present a proper factual showing of freedom from contributory negligence. There is no affidavit submitted by the plaintiff himself, and there is no proper showing of what he did in the alleged exercise of due care. Thus, the motion for summary judgment should have been denied. (OPLR 3212, subd. [b] ; 4 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, N. Y. Civ. Prae., par. 3212.03.) Concur — Botein, P. J., Rabin, Tálente, Stevens and Eager, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 A.D.2d 716, 263 N.Y.S.2d 371, 1965 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3351, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/taub-v-clinton-taxi-corp-nyappdiv-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack