From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brodersen v. Katzman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 12, 1966
26 A.D.2d 693 (N.Y. App. Div. 1966)

Opinion

July 12, 1966


In an action to recover damages for personal injury, medical expenses and loss of services, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County, entered March 3, 1966, which granted plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and directed an assessment of damages. Order affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements. The court unanimously agrees that, if liability were the sole issue, this would be a proper case for the granting of summary judgment to plaintiffs. Defendant, with a disregard of caution, accelerated his car into the rear of plaintiffs' car which was stationary and waiting for a traffic light to change. Defendant's negligence is clear. The dissenting Justices assert that a question of fact exists as to whether any injury at all was sustained, thus necessitating a plenary trial of all the issues (see Chmela v. Vought, 15 A.D.2d 812; Smith v. Marbury, 18 A.D.2d 936). That rule is inapplicable here. The proofs show that the injured plaintiff was hospitalized for three weeks after the accident for injuries sustained as a result thereof. This is a sufficient basis to narrow the necessity for proof to an assessment of damages. Christ, Acting P.J., Hill and Benjamin, JJ., concur; Brennan and Rabin, JJ., dissent and vote to reverse the order and to deny the motion on the ground that a question of fact is presented as to whether the plaintiff wife sustained any injury at all ( Chmela v. Vought, 15 A.D.2d 812; Smith v. Marbury, 18 A.D.2d 936).


Summaries of

Brodersen v. Katzman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 12, 1966
26 A.D.2d 693 (N.Y. App. Div. 1966)
Case details for

Brodersen v. Katzman

Case Details

Full title:MIRTA BRODERSEN et al., Respondents, v. BRUCE KATZMAN, Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jul 12, 1966

Citations

26 A.D.2d 693 (N.Y. App. Div. 1966)

Citing Cases

Ross v. Nelson

ence, defendant admits to acts which constitute negligence as a matter of law ( Slavinskas v. Clinton…

Conyers v. Vinti

However, "[t]he explanation of the defendant, if he gives one, will also usually be for the jury" (…