Acevedo v. Hog Wing Lau

88 A.D.3d 751, 930 N.Y.2d 915
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 11, 2011
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 88 A.D.3d 751 (Acevedo v. Hog Wing Lau) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Acevedo v. Hog Wing Lau, 88 A.D.3d 751, 930 N.Y.2d 915 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Opinion

In support of their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, the defendants made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by tendering sufficient evidence to demonstrate the absence of any triable issues of fact (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]; Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]; Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact.

We note that while the person on whose behalf the plaintiff commenced this action suffers from, among other things, signif[752]*752icant cognitive impairments as a result of the subject accident and, thus, is not held to as high a degree of proof (see Noseworthy v City of New York, 298 NY 76 [1948]), the plaintiff is not relieved of the obligation to provide some proof from which negligence can reasonably be inferred, which she failed to do (see DeLuca v Cerda, 60 AD3d 721, 722 [2009]; see also Melendez v Parkchester Med. Servs., P.C., 76 AD3d 927, 928 [2010]).

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Skelos, J.E, Balkin, Leventhal and Hall, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Turturro v. City of New York
127 A.D.3d 732 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Sanchez-Santiago v. Call-A-Head Corp.
95 A.D.3d 1292 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
88 A.D.3d 751, 930 N.Y.2d 915, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/acevedo-v-hog-wing-lau-nyappdiv-2011.