Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp

Finding summary judgment appropriate by relying on a treating doctor's unrebutted deposition testimony

Zuckerman v. City of N.Y.

Granting summary judgment as the city's arguments were considered speculation and this was "patently inadequate to establish the existence of a factual issue requiring a trial . . ."

Friends of Animals, Inc. v. Associated Fur Mfrs., Inc.

Finding summary judgment shall be granted only when there are no issues of material fact and the evidence requires the court to direct judgment in favor of the. movant as a matter of law.

Sillman v. Twentieth Century-Fox

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of the existence of any assignment, it shall have the right to withhold payments until the assignment is cancelled or withdrawn"

Stonehill Capital Mgmt. LLC v. Bank of the W.

Holding that a seller must send a "a forthright, reasonable signal" that "remove any doubt of the parties' intent" to hold an auction that does not function in the normal manner

Suffolk County Deptartment of Social Services v. James M.

In Matter of Suffolk County Dept. of Social Services v. James M., 83 N.Y.2d 178, 182 (1994), the Court of Appeals held that summary judgement is appropriate in Article 10 proceedings.

Burtman v. Brown

Finding fault in the trial court's imposition of duty of care on initial, primary care defendant doctor for the reasons that she was plaintiff's primary care doctor, saw the plaintiff first, and reviewed a radiology report taken by the specialists defendant referred plaintiff to, when the primary care doctor did not otherwise treat or have reason to be aware of plaintiff's abdominal mass

Daugharty v. Marshall