TIMOTHY HEWITT PLAINTIFF APPELLANT v. TIMOTHY HEWITT PLAINTIFF APPELLANT (2017)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

TIMOTHY C. HEWITT, PLAINTIFF–APPELLANT, v. COUNTY OF CHAUTAUQUA, RAYMOND R. WHITACRE, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PARENT OF BRENDYN J. WHITACRE, AND BRENDYN J. WHITACRE, DEFENDANTS–RESPONDENTS. TIMOTHY C. HEWITT, PLAINTIFF–APPELLANT

CA 16–02309

Decided: September 29, 2017

PRESENT: CARNI, J.P., LINDLEY, NEMOYER, CURRAN, AND TROUTMAN, JJ.

WEBSTER SZANYI LLP, BUFFALO (BRITTANY JONES OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–RESPONDENT COUNTY OF CHAUTAUQUA. BOUVIER LAW, LLP, BUFFALO (NORMAN E.S. GREENE OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS–RESPONDENTS RAYMOND R. WHITACRE, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PARENT OF BRENDYN J. WHITACRE, AND BRENDYN J. WHITACRE.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

PRO SE.

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this action seeking damages for injuries he allegedly sustained when he was struck by the metal head of a rake while at the transfer station owned by defendant County of Chautauqua. We affirm the order for reasons stated in the decision at Supreme Court. We write only to note that plaintiff failed to address in his brief that part of the order granting the individual defendants' motion for summary judgment, and thus we do not review that part of the order.

Mark W. Bennett

Clerk of the Court

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network