Legal Opinion
Ray v. Hertz Corp.
New York Supreme Court
Decided October 14, 1999PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Kibbie F. Payne, J.
Defendant Toyota Motor Credit Corp. (Toyota) moves pursuant to CPLR 3212 (e), for an order directing entry of partial summary judgment in its favor, in action No. 1, and dismissing plaintiff Brenda M. Ray’s claim for lost earnings on the ground that her claim is without merit. Defendants Samuel L. Frazier, L. K. Comstock & Co., Beverly Walker Graham, executrix of the estate of Wanda W. Hartley, and Hertz Corp. cross-move for the same relief. Defendant City of New York has not submitted opposition to the motion.
This is an action to recover damages for…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Kirschhoffer v. Van DykeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- Johnston v. ColvinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1988
- Grayson v. Irvmar Realty Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1959
- Luotto v. FieldNew York Court of Appeals · 1945
- Ivey v. New York Telephone Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1952
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Ray v. Hertz Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000