General

Omar Grant et al., Respondents, v. Alexandria Toyota et al., Respondents, and Terry Presmont, Appellant

224 A.D.2d 187637 N.Y.S.2d 932·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1996·NY

Brief incoming

Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.

Opinion

Omar Grant et al., Respondents, v Alexandria Toyota et al., Respondents, and Terry Presmont, Appellant. [637 NYS2d 932] [MAJORITY] —Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan Saks, J.), entered July 13,1995, which, inter alia, denied defendant Presmont’s motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211 and 3212, unanimously affirmed, without costs. 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 NY2d 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.