§Why CasetextPricing

Mary T. Heltz, Appellant,v.Bruce S. Barratt et al., Respondents.

Brief

49 Cited authorities

  1. Zuckerman v. City of N.Y.

    49 N.Y.2d 557 (N.Y. 1980)   Cited 24,815 times   9 Legal Analyses
    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 . . ."

  2. Yelder v. Walters

    64 A.D.3d 762 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009)   Cited 296 times

    No. 2008-05676. July 28, 2009. In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lane, J.), entered May 27, 2008, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Richard T. Lau, Jericho, N.Y. (Keith E. Ford and Thomas S. Quinn, Jr., of counsel), for appellants. Law Offices of Joseph Katz Associates, P.C. (Ben Lyhovsky, Brooklyn, N.Y., of counsel), for respondent. Before: Prudenti, P.J., Dillon,

  3. Cox v. Nunez

    23 A.D.3d 427 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)   Cited 219 times

    2004-06116. November 14, 2005. In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant Lawrence Cox appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Burke, J.), dated April 5, 2004, which denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him. Brand Glick Brand, Garden City, N.Y. (Robert S. Mazzuchin of counsel), for appellant. Epstein, Grammatico, Frankini Marotta, Hauppauge, N.Y. (Diana T. Bishop of counsel), for defendant Ivelisse

  4. Empire Insurance Company v. Food City, Inc.

    167 A.D.2d 983 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)   Cited 277 times

    November 16, 1990 Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County, Williams, J. Present — Dillon, P.J., Doerr, Boomer, Pine and Davis, JJ. Appeal unanimously dismissed without costs. Memorandum: Defendants' motion, designated one to "renew", was, in reality, a motion to reargue, as no new matter was presented which was unavailable to defendants prior to the denial of their original motion (see, Galaxy Export v. Bedford Textile Prods., 89 A.D.2d 576; see also, Gulledge v. Adams, 108 A.D.2d 950). An order

  5. Mgrditchian v. Donato

    141 A.D.2d 513 (N.Y. App. Div. 1988)   Cited 201 times

    June 6, 1988 Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Ruskin, J.). Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs. All of the facts and evidence submitted in support of the defendant's motion were available and known to it at the time of submission of the original motion by the plaintiff (see, Klein v Mount Sinai Hosp., 121 A.D.2d 164; McRory v Craft Architectural Metals Corp., 112 A.D.2d 358; Foley v Roche, 68 A.D.2d 558, affd on remand 86 A.D.2d 887, lv denied 56 N.Y.2d 507). The defense

  6. Indig v. Finkelstein

    23 N.Y.2d 728 (N.Y. 1968)   Cited 350 times
    In Indie v Finkelstein, 23 NY2d 728 (1968), the Court clearly instructed, at 729, that the "burden upon a party opposing a motion for summary judgment is not met merely by a repetition or incorporation by reference of the allegations contained in pleadings or bills of particulars, verified or unverified (citations omitted)."

  7. Tishman Construction Corp., New York v. City

    280 A.D.2d 374 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)   Cited 127 times
    In Tishman, the Appellate Division, First Department disagreed with the IAS court's conclusion that the defendant did not act with due diligence and instead found that "defendant provided a reasonable excuse for the unavailability of the records until [it filed its] renewal motion" (Tishman, 280 AD2d at 377).

  8. HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Halls

    98 A.D.3d 718 (N.Y. App. Div. 2012)   Cited 70 times

    2012-08-29 HSBC BANK USA, N.A., etc., respondent, v. Joyce HALLS, et al., defendants, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., etc., appellant. Sanders, Gutman & Brodie, P.C., Brooklyn, N.Y. (Alan L. Lebowitz, Robert Gutman, and D. Michael Roberts of counsel), for appellant. Hogan Lovells U.S. LLP, New York, N.Y. (David Dunn and Renee Garcia, and Jessica L. Ellsworth and Mary Helen Wimberly, Washington, D.C., pro hac vice, of counsel), for respondent. RUTH C. BALKIN Sanders, Gutman & Brodie

  9. Nevarez v. S.R.M

    58 A.D.3d 295 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)   Cited 63 times
    Denying summary judgment "because the record demonstrates questions of fact as to [defendant's] comparative negligence. . . . If plaintiff's vehicle had already started to enter the intersection when [defendant] approached it, defendant had a duty to use reasonable care to avoid the collision."

  10. Tibbits v. Verizon

    40 A.D.3d 1300 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)   Cited 63 times

    No. 501663. May 17, 2007. Peters, J.P. Appeals (1) from an order of the Supreme Court (Teresi, J.), entered March 8, 2006 in Albany County, which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and (2) from that part of an order of said court, entered June 21, 2006 in Albany County, which denied plaintiffs motion to renew. Richard A. Kohn, Albany, for appellant. Jones Day, New York City (Shari M. Goldsmith of counsel), for respondent. Before: Spain, Mugglin, Rose and Lahtinen