Alzndane v. Habibian

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Alzndane v. Habibian

52 A.D.3d 551, 858 N.Y.S.2d 896

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 10, 2008

StatusPublished

This text of 52 A.D.3d 551 (Alzndane v. Habibian) 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

Alzndane v. Habibian, 52 A.D.3d 551, 858 N.Y.S.2d 896 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action 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 (McCabe, J.), entered February 23, 2007, as granted that branch of the motion of the defendants Yousef Habibian, Flora Habibian, and 925-939 Nassau Road, LLC, which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them, and that branch of the cross motion of the defendant G & D Ventures, Inc., doing business as Color Laundromat, which was for the same relief.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs payable to the defendants appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

In opposition to the defendants’ prima facie showing of their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 327 [1986]). Lifson, J.P, Florio, Garni and Belen, JJ., concur.

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

In an action 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 (McCabe, J.), entered February 23, 2007, as granted that branch of the motion of the defendants Yousef Habibian, Flora Habibian, and 925-939 Nassau Road, LLC, which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them, and that branch of the cross motion of the defendant G & D Ventures, Inc., doing business as Color Laundromat, which was for the same relief.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs payable to the defendants appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

In opposition to the defendants’ prima facie showing of their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 327 [1986]). Lifson, J.P, Florio, Garni and Belen, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 A.D.3d 551, 858 N.Y.S.2d 896, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alzndane-v-habibian-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack