Olan v. Farrell Lines Inc.

N.Y.

Court: New York Court of Appeals

Citations: 64 N.Y.2d 1092, 489 N.Y.S.2d 884, 479 N.E.2d 229, 1985 N.Y. LEXIS 14221

Decision Date: 4/25/1985

Jurisdiction: NY

Bluebook Citation: Olan v. Farrell Lines Inc., 64 N.Y.2d 1092, 489 N.Y.S.2d 884, 479 N.E.2d 229, 1985 N.Y. LEXIS 14221 (1985)

More Cases: N.Y. decisions from 1985

Citation analytics

How this case sits in the citation network, derived from CiteLaw's graph of published opinions.

★Highly CitedTop 3% most-cited · cited by 99 decisions

Citing decisions

Authorities cited

Courts citing

Citations by decade

1980s1990s2000s2010s2020s

Courts citing this case

N.Y. App. Div.81

N.Y. Sup. Ct.7

N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty.7

N.Y.2

N.Y. App. Term1

N.Y. Sur. Ct.1

Most recently cited by10

2026Trummer Hospitality Holdings LLC v. 287 PAS LLC N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty.
2026Lavine v. LaFayette Cent. Sch. Dist. N.Y. App. Div.
2024Regions Bank v. VativoRx, LLC N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty.
2024Skylar v. Lenox Hill Hosp. N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty.
2024White v. Turitz N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty.
2024Sosa v. 310 Group LLC N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty.
2024McHugh v. Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y., Inc. N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty.
2024CFG Merchant Solutions, LLC v. Tawa Roti Dhaulagiri Food, Corp N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty.
2023Advanced Alternative Media, Inc. v. Hindlin N.Y. App. Div.
2022Summors v. Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J. N.Y. App. Div.

Cites 2 cases

Counts reflect decisions in the CiteLaw corpus and may lag very recent opinions.

Opinion

Ismael Olan, Appellant, v Farrell Lines Incorporated, Respondent.

Attorneys

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
Paul C. Matthews and Morgan Kennedy for appellant.
Stephen K. Carr and Bernard J. Vaughn for respondent.

majority

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, for the reasons stated in its memorandum (105 AD2d 653). We add only that, before considering whether plaintiff put forth sufficient proof to defeat defendant’s motion for summary judgment, the issue of whether defendant established its defense must first be addressed (CPLR 3212 [b]; Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562). In this instance, defendant put forth sufficient evidentiary proof in admissible form, and plaintiff raised no issue of material fact to support its claim of negligence and unseaworthiness. The fact that defendant’s supporting proof was placed before the court by way of an attorney’s affidavit annexing plaintiff’s deposition testimony and other proof, rather than affidavits of fact on personal knowledge, does not defeat defendant’s right to summary judgment (see, Gaeta v New York News, 62 NY2d 340, 350; Zuckerman v City of New York, supra, p 563).

Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Jasen, Meyer, Simons and Kaye concur; Judge Alexander taking no part.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.