Arslanian v. Volkswagen of America, Inc.

3 Citing cases

  1. Gallo v. Bay Ridge Lincoln Mercury, Inc.

    262 A.D.2d 450 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)   Cited 16 times

    As a result, the Supreme Court properly denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment based on the spoliation of that evidence, and properly declined to impose a sanction ( see, Popfinger v. Terminix Intl. Co. Ltd. Partnership, 251 A.D.2d 564; Prasad v. B.K. Chevrolet, 184 A.D.2d 626). The Supreme Court properly determined that issues of fact exist as to whether the defendant negligently repaired the brakes, and whether those repairs rendered the brakes defective and proximately caused the accident ( see, Retz v. Alco Equip., 259 A.D.2d 898 [3d Dept., Mar. 11, 1999]; Mitchell v. Maguire Co., 151 A.D.2d 355, 356; Arslanian v. Volkswagen of America, Inc., 113 A.D.2d 858; see also, Rodolitz v. Boston-Old Colony Ins. Co., 74 A.D.2d 821).

  2. Levine v. Gugliotti

    2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 30459 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2015)

    CNH's failure to make a prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment requires a denial of the motion, regardless of the sufficiency of the opposing papers (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., supra; Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., supra). In any event, a review of the expert affidavits submitted by the plaintiff in opposition to the motion indicate that they are sufficient to defeat the motion as CNH has failed to introduce any expert evidence (Arslanian v Volkswagen of America, Inc., 113 AD2d 858, 493 NYS2d 588 [2d Dept 1985]). Accordingly, CNH's motion for summary judgment is denied.

  3. Levine v. Gugliotti

    2015 N.Y. Slip Op. 30459 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2015)

    CNH's failure to make a prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment requires a denial of the motion, regardless of the sufficiency of the opposing papers (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., supra; Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., supra). In any event, a review of the expert affidavits submitted by the plaintiff in opposition to the motion indicate that they are sufficient to defeat the motion as CNH has failed to introduce any expert evidence (Arslanian v Volkswagen of America, Inc., 113 AD2d 858, 493 NYS2d 588 [2d Dept 1985]). Accordingly, CNH's motion for summary judgment is denied.