From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Yadgarov v. Dekel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 15, 2003
2 A.D.3d 631 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2003-03988.

Decided December 15, 2003.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hart, J.), dated March 31, 2003, which denied his motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

Elliot Ifraimoff Associates, P.C., Rego Park, N.Y. (David E. Waterbury of counsel), for appellant.

Agen Stenz, Westbury, N.Y. (Effy Belessis of counsel), for respondent.

Before: DANIEL F. LUCIANO, SANDRA L. TOWNES, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, his motion was premature since substantial discovery remains outstanding ( see generally Ross v. Curtis-Palmer Hydro-Elec. Co., 81 N.Y.2d 494, 506). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the motion.

SMITH, J.P., McGINITY, LUCIANO and TOWNES, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Yadgarov v. Dekel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 15, 2003
2 A.D.3d 631 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Yadgarov v. Dekel

Case Details

Full title:PYOTR YADGAROV, appellant, v. GADI DEKEL, respondent

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

Date published: Dec 15, 2003

Citations

2 A.D.3d 631 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
768 N.Y.S.2d 337

Citing Cases

Marquina v. Pellegrini

Accordingly, defendant Pellegrini presented a prima facie entitlement to summary judgment as a matter of law…

Seye v. Sibbio

The court denies the application for summary judgment with leave to renew after all discovery (including the…