From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Marino v. Schoppmeyer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 10, 1997
236 A.D.2d 450 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

February 10, 1997.

In an action to recover damages for wrongful death and conscious pain and suffering, the defendants Darlene Dennis and Walter Dennis appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated June 22, 1996, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against them.

Before: Mangano, P.J., Sullivan, Altman and McGinity, JJ.


Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion of the defendants Darlene Dennis and Walter Dennis for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against them is granted, and the action against the remaining defendants is severed.

The plaintiffs failed to adduce any probative evidence that the appellants, Darlene Dennis and Walter Dennis, permitted their 17-year-old son, the defendant Leo F. Schoppmeyer, Jr., to drive his grandmother's car, or were even aware that Schopp-meyer's grandmother had given him permission to drive her car. Since the plaintiffs failed to raise any triable issues with respect to negligent entrustment of a dangerous instrumentality, the motion of the appellants for summary judgment dismissing this cause of action should have been granted ( see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562; Nolechek v Gesuale, 46 NY2d 332, 336; Brahm v Hatch, 203 AD2d 640, 642; Cammilone v Popham, 157 AD2d 816; Lenv City of Co-hoes, 144 AD2d 187).


Summaries of

Marino v. Schoppmeyer

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Feb 10, 1997
236 A.D.2d 450 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

Marino v. Schoppmeyer

Case Details

Full title:MATTHEW MARINO et al., Respondents, v. LEO F. SCHOPPMEYER, JR., et al.…

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

Date published: Feb 10, 1997

Citations

236 A.D.2d 450 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
654 N.Y.S.2d 582

Citing Cases

PEERLESS INS. CO. v. PRIM

If the third cause of action is viewed as a claim for negligent entrustment, Stephanie has established as a…