From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Marquis v. Eisenstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 29, 2004
5 A.D.3d 741 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

2003-03875.

Decided March 29, 2004.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Dowd, J.), dated March 10, 2003, which denied their motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

Bailly McMillan, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. (Brian M. Healy and Katherine Hall of counsel), for appellants.

Herzfeld Rubin, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Neil R. Finkston of counsel), for respondents.

Before: DAVID S. RITTER, J.P., GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, SANDRA L. TOWNES, STEPHEN G. CRANE, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs failed to submit evidence sufficient to establish their entitlement to summary judgment on the issue of liability ( see Winegrad v. New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 N.Y.2d 851; Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320; Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557). Questions of fact exist as to whether the plaintiff pedestrian was negligent in crossing the roadway in a place other than an intersection or a crosswalk, and whether the defendant driver failed to exercise due care to avoid the accident ( see Schager v. Lino Bordi, Inc., 2 A.D.3d 828; Dragunova v. Dondero, 305 A.D.2d 449, 450; Garner v. Fox, 265 A.D.2d 525, 526).

RITTER, J.P., GOLDSTEIN, TOWNES and CRANE, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Marquis v. Eisenstein

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 29, 2004
5 A.D.3d 741 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

Marquis v. Eisenstein

Case Details

Full title:PHILIP E. MARQUIS, ET AL., appellants, v. MORTON M. EISENSTEIN, ET AL.…

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

Date published: Mar 29, 2004

Citations

5 A.D.3d 741 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
773 N.Y.S.2d 596

Citing Cases

Sokolovsky v. Mucip Inc.

"A motion for judgment as a matter of law is appropriate only where the trial court finds that, upon the…

MANESSIS v. CHANG-NAM SONG

Despite this inexcusable failure on the part of the movant's counsel, the Song defendants' motion must be…