Trent v. Town of River-Head

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Trent v. Town of River-Head

247 A.D.2d 606, 669 N.Y.S.2d 230, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1796

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

DecidedFebruary 23, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 247 A.D.2d 606 (Trent v. Town of River-Head) 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

Trent v. Town of River-Head, 247 A.D.2d 606, 669 N.Y.S.2d 230, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1796 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiffs appeal and the defendant Paulette A. Trent separately appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Berler, J.), dated May 16, 1996, which granted the motion of the defendants Wayne E. Boyd and Mary Boyd for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is reversed, with one bill of costs, and the motion is denied.

This action arises out of an automobile accident in which vehicles driven by the defendants Paulette A. Trent and Wayne E. Boyd were traveling on a two-lane road in opposite directions when they collided. Contrary to the holding of the Supreme Court, we hold, based on the conflicting testimony of the two drivers, that an issue of fact exists as to whether or not either or both vehicles crossed over into the opposing lane of traffic, thus causing or contributing to the accident (cf., Williams v Econ, 221 AD2d 429). Therefore, the Supreme Court erred in granting summary judgment to the respondents.

O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Thompson, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiffs appeal and the defendant Paulette A. Trent separately appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Berler, J.), dated May 16, 1996, which granted the motion of the defendants Wayne E. Boyd and Mary Boyd for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is reversed, with one bill of costs, and the motion is denied.

This action arises out of an automobile accident in which vehicles driven by the defendants Paulette A. Trent and Wayne E. Boyd were traveling on a two-lane road in opposite directions when they collided. Contrary to the holding of the Supreme Court, we hold, based on the conflicting testimony of the two drivers, that an issue of fact exists as to whether or not either or both vehicles crossed over into the opposing lane of traffic, thus causing or contributing to the accident (cf., Williams v Econ, 221 AD2d 429). Therefore, the Supreme Court erred in granting summary judgment to the respondents.

O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Thompson, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

247 A.D.2d 606, 669 N.Y.S.2d 230, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1796, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/trent-v-town-of-river-head-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack