Andre v. Pomeroy
New York Court of Appeals
1Dissent
Chief Judge Breitel
(dissenting). I dissent and would affirm the order of the Appellate Division. Defendant Pomeroy’s negligence was not established as a matter of law, the only basis for granting summary judgment.
Professor Siegal has stated succinctly: “ The very question of whether the defendant’s conduct amounts to ‘ negligence ’ is inherently a question for the fact-trier in all but the most egregious instances. Even the so-called ‘ rear-end ’ collision, the one most presumptively favorable to the plaintiff, can readily be shown to present factors necessitating trial ” (Siegel, Practice…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Wagner v. International Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1921
- Sadowski v. Long Island R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1944
- Tedla v. EllmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1939
- Mink v. KeimNew York Court of Appeals · 1943
- Wardrop v. . Santi Moving Express Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1922
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.