From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Grant v. Toyota

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 1, 1996
224 A.D.2d 187 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

February 1, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan Saks, J.).


The complaint sufficiently states a cause of action against defendant Presmont for negligent maintenance of the offending vehicle. Denial of summary judgment was also proper since defendant failed to establish her defenses to the action as a matter of law by tender of evidentiary proof in admissible form ( see, Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562). Moreover, plaintiffs, with the aid of discovery, may be able to establish defendant-appellant rented the vehicle for a sufficient period of time to be deemed an "owner" under Vehicle and Traffic Law §§ 128 and 388 (3).

Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Ellerin, Kupferman, Nardelli and Mazzarelli, JJ.


Summaries of

Grant v. Toyota

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Feb 1, 1996
224 A.D.2d 187 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Grant v. Toyota

Case Details

Full title:OMAR GRANT et al., Respondents, v. ALEXANDRIA TOYOTA et al., Respondents…

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

Date published: Feb 1, 1996

Citations

224 A.D.2d 187 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
637 N.Y.S.2d 931

Citing Cases

Ramos v. Brown

Plaintiff does not specify to which entity he refers. However, he relies on the Vehicle and Traffic Law § 128…

Martin v. Gelco Corp.

ntrustment (see De La Cruz v Dalmida, 151 AD3d 563 [1st Dept 2017]) against Precision (or Primeline). As to…