King v. Car Rentals, Inc.
New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
29 A.D.3d 205 (2006)
- Written by Serena Lipski, JD
Facts
Jody King (plaintiff) was a passenger in a car driven by Syed Ali (defendant) when they were in a one-car accident in Quebec on January 3, 1999. Ali and King were returning to the United States after celebrating the New Year in Montreal. Ali had rented the car from Car Rentals, Inc., d/b/a Avis Rent A Car (Car Rentals) (defendant) in New Jersey and picked up King in Connecticut before heading to Montreal. Ali and King became friends while students at New York University, from which they graduated in spring 1998. King was born in New York, where he maintained a permanent residence with his mother until September 2001. In September 1998, King began working as a teacher in Connecticut, but King considered New York to be his permanent residence, keeping his New York driver’s license. Ali was from New Jersey, where he lived until began attending New York University in 1994. After graduation, Ali planned to begin working with a New York company in January 1999. In the meantime, Ali continued to work in Manhattan, living with his sister in a Manhattan apartment. In December 1998, Ali moved in with his parents in New Jersey for a few weeks, but he intended that move to be temporary. Ali had employment training in Chicago beginning in January 1999 and then returned to live in Manhattan after the training concluded. Following the accident, King sued both Ali and Car Rentals, a New Jersey company that only did business in New Jersey, in New York state court, asserting Car Rentals was vicariously liable for Ali’s negligence. King moved for summary judgment on liability, arguing that New York law applied. Car Rentals moved for summary judgment, arguing that New Jersey law applied, making Car Rentals not liable. Ali also moved for summary judgment, arguing that Quebec law applied and limited damages. The trial court held that Quebec law applied, granting Ali’s motion and denying King’s and Car Rentals’s motions.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Spolzino, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.