Skip to Main Content
Services Talent Knowledge
Site Search


Our attorneys stay on top of changes in legislation, agency regulations, case law, and industry trends—then craft timely legal alerts to keep clients up to date on legal developments important to their business.

March 28, 2023

Affidavits Lacking Personal Knowledge and Attaching Uncertified Records Have No Probative Value

A recent decision from the Appellate Division, First Department highlighted the foundational requirement that affidavits and accompanying documents submitted in support of a summary judgment motion must be in admissible form to be considered.  

In Muslar v. Hall,the plaintiff alleged personal injuries arising out of a motor vehicle accident with a semi. In addition to suing the driver of the truck, the plaintiff commenced his action against the owner of the truck (Global), the lessor of the truck (GDM), and the lessee and driver’s employer (Asplundh Construction, LLC). 

Global and GDM, as owner and lessor, moved for summary judgment based on the claimed applicability of the Graves Amendment (codified at 49 USC § 30106), which bars actions against owners or lessors of motor vehicles based solely on their vicarious liability. In order for the Graves Amendment to apply, these owners or lessors must demonstrate: (1) they are in the business of leasing motor vehicles, (2) they leased the vehicle at issue, (3) the subject accident occurred during the lease period, and (4) it is undisputed that negligent maintenance did not contribute to the subject accident.

In support of their motion, Global and GDM submitted affidavits of their controller and president, respectively, stating they are engaged in the business of leasing motor vehicles, they leased the subject truck to lessee Asplundh Construction, and the defendant-driver was operating the subject truck at the time the rental agreement was in effect. 

The trial court granted the request for summary judgment on this evidence, but the First Department ultimately disagreed. In reversing the trial court’s ruling, the First Department found the submitted affidavits lacked probative value, as they failed to set forth the basis for the respective representatives’ knowledge of the facts stated therein either by demonstrating personal knowledge or through submission of admissible business records. 

While purported lease documents were attached to these affidavits, those documents were not certified, the affidavits did not lay a sufficient foundation for the documents’ admissibility, and the documents nonetheless appeared incomplete.2
The First Department’s decision restates a fundamental principle that requests for summary judgment must be supported by evidence in admissible form, including affidavits that must set forth the basis of an affiant’s knowledge. These threshold evidentiary issues are key to pursuing relief as a movant and can likewise be key in opposing a request for relief as a nonmovant.

1Muslar v. Hall, 2023 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1050 (1st Dept. Feb. 28, 2023).

2The court further noted the affidavits failed to allege that negligent maintenance did not contribute to the subject accident, a necessary element for the applicability of the Grave Amendment. 

If you have questions regarding the content of this alert, please contact Jessica Tariq, associate, at; Matthew Larkin, Torts & Products Liability Defense Practice Area chair, at; or another member of the firm’s Torts & Products Liability Defense Practice Area.  


Click here to sign up for alerts, blog posts, and firm news.

Featured Media


US Supreme Court Shrinks Federal Authority Under the Clean Water Act


Supreme Court Strikes Down Taxing Authorities' Right to Retain Surplus Monies in "Strict Foreclosures"


Appellate Division, Third Department, Denies Appeal and Upholds Office of Renewable Energy Siting Regulations


NYS Public Service Commission Formally Initiates Proceeding to Establish What Constitutes "Zero Emission" Under the CLCPA


NYS Appellate Court Dismisses Common Law Claims Against Contractor for Injuries Sustained by "Special Employee"


Child Victim Act Complaint Dismissed for Failure to Sufficiently Allege Special Duty

This site uses cookies to give you the best experience possible on our site and in some cases direct advertisements to you based upon your use of our site.

By clicking [I agree], you are agreeing to our use of cookies. For information on what cookies we use and how to manage our use of cookies, please visit our Privacy Statement.

I AgreeOpt-Out