Legal Opinion

Lauricella v. McKinney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided June 8, 2001PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for personal injuries that he sustained in a one-car accident in the State of Michigan. The automobile in which plaintiff was a passenger struck a pool of water during a heavy rainstorm, spun out of control and rolled over. Defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint based on the “sudden emergency doctrine” under Michigan law (see, Moore v Spangler, 401 Mich 360, 382-383, 258 NW2d 34, 43; Vander Laan v Miedema, 385 Mich 226, 231-232, 188 NW2d 564, 567). Supreme Court…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Moore v. SpanglerMichigan Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Kuci v. Manhattan & Bronx Surface Transit Operating AuthorityNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
  3. Vander Laan v. MiedemaMichigan Supreme Court · 1971
  4. Sacco v. PhillippsenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Barnes v. FixAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
  2. Greenwell v. MoodyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API