Vaynberg v. Provident Operating Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Vaynberg v. Provident Operating Corp.

269 A.D.2d 442, 703 N.Y.S.2d 208, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1403

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

DecidedFebruary 14, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 269 A.D.2d 442 (Vaynberg v. Provident Operating 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

Vaynberg v. Provident Operating Corp., 269 A.D.2d 442, 703 N.Y.S.2d 208, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1403 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rappaport, J.), dated March 3, 1999, as granted that branch of the plaintiff’s motion which was for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, with costs, and that branch of the motion which was for summary judgment on the issue of liability is denied.

The Supreme Court erred in granting that branch of the plaintiff’s motion which was for summary judgment on the issue of liability. Res ipsa loquitur is a rule of evidence, which merely provides a permissible inference of negligence, rather than a presumption (see, Dermatossian v New York City Tr. Auth., 67 NY2d 219, 226; Feuer v HASC Summer Program, 247 AD2d 429; Davis v Federated Dept. Stores, 227 AD2d 514). Thus, application of the doctrine as a basis for awarding summary judgment is inappropriate (see, Feuer v HASC Summer Program, supra; Davis v Federated Dept. Stores, supra; Shin[443]*443shine Corp. v Kinney Sys., 173 AD2d 293, 294; Veltri v Stahl, 155 AD2d 287, 288). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Joy and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rappaport, J.), dated March 3, 1999, as granted that branch of the plaintiff’s motion which was for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, with costs, and that branch of the motion which was for summary judgment on the issue of liability is denied.

The Supreme Court erred in granting that branch of the plaintiff’s motion which was for summary judgment on the issue of liability. Res ipsa loquitur is a rule of evidence, which merely provides a permissible inference of negligence, rather than a presumption (see, Dermatossian v New York City Tr. Auth., 67 NY2d 219, 226; Feuer v HASC Summer Program, 247 AD2d 429; Davis v Federated Dept. Stores, 227 AD2d 514). Thus, application of the doctrine as a basis for awarding summary judgment is inappropriate (see, Feuer v HASC Summer Program, supra; Davis v Federated Dept. Stores, supra; Shin[443]*443shine Corp. v Kinney Sys., 173 AD2d 293, 294; Veltri v Stahl, 155 AD2d 287, 288). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Joy and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

269 A.D.2d 442, 703 N.Y.S.2d 208, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1403, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vaynberg-v-provident-operating-corp-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack