From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chmela v. Vought

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 26, 1962
15 A.D.2d 812 (N.Y. App. Div. 1962)

Opinion

February 26, 1962


In a negligence action to recover damages for injury to person and property, the defendant appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County, dated January 20, 1961, as granted the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and directed an assessment of damages. Order, insofar as appealed from, reversed, without costs, and plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment denied. The plaintiffs were in an automobile owned by one of them. While this automobile was motionless, it was struck in the rear by an automobile owned and operated by defendant. In view of the sharp dispute as to the force of the impact; as to the alleged injuries; and as to whether there were any injuries at all, there should be a trial of the entire case so that it may be determined whether the claimed injuries could and did result from the accident ( Steinbach v. Denker, 13 A.D.2d 795; Goldman v. Reese, 13 A.D.2d 994; Ruppert v. Building Materials Dist., 10 A.D.2d 621). Ughetta, Acting P.J., Christ, Brennan, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Chmela v. Vought

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 26, 1962
15 A.D.2d 812 (N.Y. App. Div. 1962)
Case details for

Chmela v. Vought

Case Details

Full title:MARY CHMELA et al., Respondents, v. MELVIN P. VOUGHT, Appellant

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

Date published: Feb 26, 1962

Citations

15 A.D.2d 812 (N.Y. App. Div. 1962)

Citing Cases

Brodersen v. Katzman

Defendant's negligence is clear. The dissenting Justices assert that a question of fact exists as to whether…

Vitale v. Fine

Order reversed, without costs, and motion denied. In our opinion, issues of fact were tendered with respect…