From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Smith v. Stark

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 30, 1984
103 A.D.2d 844 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)

Opinion

July 30, 1984

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries based upon theories of negligence, products liability and breach of warranty, plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (McGinity, J.), entered February 3, 1984, as granted the cross motion of defendant Union Carbide for summary judgment dismissing the action as against it.


¶ Order affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

¶ Plaintiff has failed to present a genuine issue of fact as to defendant Union Carbide's liability (see Southern Assoc. v. United Brands Co., 67 A.D.2d 199). Plaintiff's testimony at an examination before trial effectively belies his contention that the design of the swimming pool liner manufactured by Union Carbide proximately caused his accident (cf. Sommella v. Roach, 91 A.D.2d 630, affd 59 N.Y.2d 622). Mollen, P.J., Weinstein, Rubin and Eiber, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Smith v. Stark

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 30, 1984
103 A.D.2d 844 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)
Case details for

Smith v. Stark

Case Details

Full title:PAUL SMITH, Appellant, v. DIANNE STARK et al., Defendants, and UNION…

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

Date published: Jul 30, 1984

Citations

103 A.D.2d 844 (N.Y. App. Div. 1984)

Citing Cases

Glittenberg v. Doughboy

Summary judgment in favor of the defendant has been based on lack of a causal connection between the alleged…

Smith v. Stark

Decided December 27, 1984 Appeal from (2d dept: 103 A.D.2d 844) MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO…