From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jewell v. Cumberland Farms, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 13, 1997
235 A.D.2d 397 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

January 13, 1997.

In an action to recover damages for wrongful death pursuant to General Obligations Law §§ 11-100 and 11-101, the defendant appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Hillery, J.), dated January 17, 1996, as denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Before: Miller, J. P., Ritter, Sullivan, Friedmann and Krausman, JJ.


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The parties' submissions raised triable issues of fact ( see, CPLR 3212 [b]) both as to whether the defendant sold beer directly ( see, Sherman v Robinson, 80 NY2d 483, 485) to the 19-year-old operator of the vehicle involved in the accident which resulted in the death of James E. Jewell, and as to whether the deceased procured or caused the operator's intoxication ( see, Prunty v Keltie's Bum Steer, 163 AD2d 595).


Summaries of

Jewell v. Cumberland Farms, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 13, 1997
235 A.D.2d 397 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

Jewell v. Cumberland Farms, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT M. JEWELL et al., Respondents, v. CUMBERLAND FARMS, INC., Appellant

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

Date published: Jan 13, 1997

Citations

235 A.D.2d 397 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
652 N.Y.S.2d 550

Citing Cases

Tunison v. Stapleton

To make a prima facie showing of its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the defendant was required…

Baker v. D.J. Stapleton Inc

In support of its motion for summary judgment, the defendant submitted deposition testimony which presented…