From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Powell v. Trans-Auto Systems, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 12, 1969
32 A.D.2d 650 (N.Y. App. Div. 1969)

Opinion

May 12, 1969


Order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County, dated June 12, 1968, affirmed, without costs. This third motion by plaintiff for summary judgment was properly denied. The practice of making successive motions for summary judgment, each based upon new factual assertions and proofs which were available to the movant from the outset, is to be discouraged (cf. Levitz v. Robbins Music Corp., 17 A.D.2d 801). In any event, there are present issues of fact as to plaintiff's contributory negligence. Christ, Acting P.J., Brennan, Rabin, Benjamin and Martuscello, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Powell v. Trans-Auto Systems, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 12, 1969
32 A.D.2d 650 (N.Y. App. Div. 1969)
Case details for

Powell v. Trans-Auto Systems, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:MILAN POWELL, Appellant, v. TRANS-AUTO SYSTEMS, INC., et al., Respondents

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

Date published: May 12, 1969

Citations

32 A.D.2d 650 (N.Y. App. Div. 1969)
300 N.Y.S.2d 747

Citing Cases

Vinar v. Litman

On appeal, the attorney defendants contend, inter alia, that the court erred in denying their motion since…

McIvor v. Di Benedetto

Under the unusual circumstances of this case and in the absence of prejudice to the plaintiff, who never…