Admissions by omission CPLR § 3018(a)

CPLR
§
3018 Responsive pleadings
(a) Denials

Miller v Bah, 2010 NY Slip Op 04753 (App. Div., 2nd, 2010)

After first considering the evidence presented by the plaintiff, the
Supreme Court next considered certain admissions made by the defendant.
In this regard, the complaint contained certain allegations concerning
the defendant's ownership and operation of a particular vehicle at the
time of the accident, which the defendant failed to address in his
answer. The defendant therefore was deemed to have admitted the truth of
those allegations
(see CPLR 3018[a]; Maplewood, Inc. v Wood, 21
AD3d 933), and "admissions . . . in pleadings are always in evidence
for all the purposes of the trial of [an] action"
(Braun v Ahmed, 127
AD2d 418, 422 [internal quotation marks omitted]). The Supreme Court
found that even when the evidence was coupled with the defendant's
admissions, the plaintiff failed to "link" the defendant to the
offending vehicle. Thus, the Supreme Court granted the defendant's
motion pursuant to CPLR 4401 for judgment as a matter of law.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s