From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schrabal v. Holiday Beach Prop. Owners Ass'n

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 6, 1993
195 A.D.2d 453 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

July 6, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Copertino, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs to the respondent Holiday Beach Property Owners Association, Inc.

The instant motion by the plaintiff-intervenor represents the second attempt by a party to these proceedings to obtain summary judgment against the defendants on the first cause of action. The same essential facts upon which this motion relies were previously set forth in two prior motions. The first motion, for a preliminary injunction, was denied. By decision and order dated May 22, 1989, this Court affirmed the denial of the motion for a preliminary injunction, finding that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate an unreasonable interference with his easement rights (see, Schrabal v. Holiday Beach Prop. Owners Assn., 150 A.D.2d 670). The plaintiff then moved for summary judgment against the defendants, alleging essentially the same facts advanced in favor of the preliminary injunction application. In an order dated December 6, 1989, the Supreme Court denied the motion for summary judgment, noting that this Court had found that the plaintiff failed to demonstrate an unreasonable interference with his easement rights. The Supreme Court additionally noted that there were issues of fact barring summary judgment (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557).

Subsequently, the plaintiff-intervenor moved for summary judgment, based upon the same relevant facts, which the court again denied. On appeal, the plaintiff and plaintiff-intervenor contend that the Supreme Court should have granted the motion for summary judgment against the defendants. We disagree. The plaintiff and the plaintiff-intervenor have failed to demonstrate evidentiary facts sufficient to entitle them to judgment as a matter of law (see, Winegrad v. New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 N.Y.2d 851; County Oil Co. v. Bayview Owners Corp., 181 A.D.2d 809). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied summary judgment. Thompson, J.P., Rosenblatt, Pizzuto and Santucci, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Schrabal v. Holiday Beach Prop. Owners Ass'n

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 6, 1993
195 A.D.2d 453 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

Schrabal v. Holiday Beach Prop. Owners Ass'n

Case Details

Full title:JOSEF SCHRABAL, Appellant, and JOHN P. HASSAN, Intervenor-Appellant, v…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jul 6, 1993

Citations

195 A.D.2d 453 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
601 N.Y.S.2d 818

Citing Cases

Green v. Mann

This long-time use, without objection by the servient tenement, establishes the location of the easement (…