Yacoub v. Strauss

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Yacoub v. Strauss

248 A.D.2d 999, 670 N.Y.S.2d 150, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3073

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

DecidedMarch 13, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 248 A.D.2d 999 (Yacoub v. Strauss) 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

Yacoub v. Strauss, 248 A.D.2d 999, 670 N.Y.S.2d 150, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3073 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and motion denied. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting plaintiffs’ motion for [1000]*1000partial summary judgment on liability because there are issues of fact with respect to the negligence of Michael J. Strauss (defendant) and the comparative negligence of Joseph Yacoub (plaintiff) (see, Hollenbaugh v Frontier Asphalt, 231 AD2d 865). Those issues of fact include the speed at which plaintiffs bicycle was traveling and whether defendant’s vision was obscured by a slow-moving vehicle in the oncoming lane. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Bergin, J. — Summary Judgment.)

Present — Denman, P. J., Hayes, Balio, Boehm and Fallon, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs and motion denied. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting plaintiffs’ motion for [1000]*1000partial summary judgment on liability because there are issues of fact with respect to the negligence of Michael J. Strauss (defendant) and the comparative negligence of Joseph Yacoub (plaintiff) (see, Hollenbaugh v Frontier Asphalt, 231 AD2d 865). Those issues of fact include the speed at which plaintiffs bicycle was traveling and whether defendant’s vision was obscured by a slow-moving vehicle in the oncoming lane. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Bergin, J. — Summary Judgment.)

Present — Denman, P. J., Hayes, Balio, Boehm and Fallon, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

248 A.D.2d 999, 670 N.Y.S.2d 150, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3073, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yacoub-v-strauss-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack