AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

SANDRA MARLOWE AND JOSEPH A. MARLOWE, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. AMBER L. MUHLNICKEL, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously reversed on the law without costs, the motion is granted and the complaint is dismissed.

Memorandum:

Plaintiffs commenced this action to recover damages for injuries sustained by plaintiff Sandra Marlowe in a motor vehicle accident. Supreme Court erred in denying defendant's motion seeking summary judgment dismissing the complaint based on the release signed by plaintiffs. Defendant met her initial burden of establishing her entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting the release and the deposition testimony of plaintiffs acknowledging their signatures on that release ( see Fleming v. Ponziani, 24 N.Y.2d 105, 111). "Where, as here, the language of a release is clear and unambiguous, the signing of a release is a `jural act' binding on the parties" ( Booth v. 3669 Delaware, 92 N.Y.2d 934, 935). In opposition to the motion, plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact with respect to their claim that the release is void based on fraud ( see generally Mergler v. Crystal Props. Assoc., 179 A.D.2d 177, 181).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MARLOWE v. MUHLNICKEL
(May 3, 2002)