14 Cited authorities

  1. Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp

    68 N.Y.2d 320 (N.Y. 1986)   Cited 16,470 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding summary judgment appropriate by relying on a treating doctor's unrebutted deposition testimony
  2. Sillman v. Twentieth Century-Fox

    3 N.Y.2d 395 (N.Y. 1957)   Cited 4,930 times
    Finding that provision prohibited assignments when the provision stated, in part, that "neither party hereto shall assign this agreement . . . without the prior written consent of the other party," and "that [defendant] shall not be required to recognize any assignments; and that if [defendant] shall receive notice of the existence of any assignment, it shall have the right to withhold payments until the assignment is cancelled or withdrawn"
  3. Todd v. Godek

    71 A.D.3d 872 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)   Cited 75 times

    No. 2009-00330. March 16, 2010. In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (McCarty, J.), entered December 11, 2008, as granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Meyer, Suozzi, English Klein, P.C., Garden City, N.Y. (Robert N. Zausmer, Donnalynn Darling, and Jen A. Leahy of counsel), for appellant. Richard T. Lau, Jericho, N.Y. (Nancy

  4. Goldstein v. Monroe County

    77 A.D.2d 232 (N.Y. App. Div. 1980)   Cited 99 times

    November 13, 1980 Appeal from the Supreme Court, Monroe County, ROBERT J. McDOWELL, J. John D. Doyle, County Attorney (Christine E. Burke of counsel), for appellants. Faraci, Guadagnino, Lange Johns (Joseph A. Regan of counsel), for respondent. SCHNEPP, J. Plaintiff is the owner of improved real property situate in the Town of Pittsford, Monroe County, to the rear of which is located a body of water known as Knowlton Creek. The creek flows in a westerly direction from the east side of East Avenue

  5. Barile v. Carroll

    280 A.D.2d 988 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)   Cited 27 times
    Holding that defendant's admitted failure to see the decedent's vehicle until the moment of impact did not defeat motion for summary judgment, due to lack of evidence that such failure was due to any negligence
  6. Trzepacz v. Jara

    11 A.D.3d 531 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)   Cited 18 times
    Granting summary judgment where a plaintiff failed to yield at an intersection and offered only conclusory assertions to oppose motion
  7. Stalikas v. United Materials

    306 A.D.2d 810 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)   Cited 19 times

    CA 02-01994 June 13, 2003. Appeal from a judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County (Dillon, J.), entered December 6, 2001, upon a jury verdict rendered in favor of defendant Michael Deakin. LAW OFFICES OF EUGENE C. TENNEY, BUFFALO (ERIC M. SHELTON OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS. HAGELIN BISCHOF, LLC, BUFFALO (DENNIS J. BISCHOF OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. PRESENT: WISNER, J.P., SCUDDER, KEHOE, GORSKI, AND LAWTON, JJ. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed

  8. Grossman v. Meredith

    48 A.D.3d 750 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)   Cited 14 times

    No. 2007-04847. February 26, 2008. In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vaughan, J.), dated March 7, 2007, which denied their motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability. Before: Skelos, J.P., Fisher, Covello and Eng, JJ. Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability is granted, and the matter is remitted to the

  9. Shapiro v. Munoz

    28 A.D.3d 638 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)   Cited 11 times

    2005-06426. April 18, 2006. In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Dollard, J.), dated May 10, 2005, which granted the motion of the defendant Raul Vivas Munoz for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him. Simon Gilman, LLP, Forest Hills, N.Y. (Keith A. Gilman and Barry Simon of counsel), for appellant. Baker, McEvoy, Morrissey Moskovits, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Holly E. Peck of

  10. L.N.L. Constr. v. M.T.F. Industries, Inc.

    190 A.D.2d 714 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)   Cited 20 times

    February 8, 1993 Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Graci, J.). Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs. The plaintiff and the defendant allegedly entered into an oral agreement to do work under two prime contracts obtained by the defendant from the New York City Housing Authority (hereinafter the NYCHA). This agreement allegedly provided that the net profits from the job were to be divided evenly between the parties. As part of the contracts entered into

  11. § 393.9 Lamps operable, prohibition of obstructions of lamps and reflectors

    49 C.F.R. § 393.9   Cited 5 times

    (a) All lamps required by this subpart shall be capable of being operated at all times. This paragraph shall not be construed to require that any auxiliary or additional lamp be capable of operating at all times. (b) Lamps and reflective devices/material required by this subpart must not be obscured by the tailboard, or by any part of the load, or its covering by dirt, or other added vehicle or work equipment, or otherwise. Exception: The conspicuity treatments on the front end protection devices