Black v. Loomis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Black v. Loomis

236 A.D.2d 338, 654 N.Y.S.2d 19, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1658

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

DecidedFebruary 27, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 236 A.D.2d 338 (Black v. Loomis) 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

Black v. Loomis, 236 A.D.2d 338, 654 N.Y.S.2d 19, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1658 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.), entered December 28, 1995, which granted defendant-respondent’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

While plaintiff is correct in noting that the plaintiff in a wrongful death action is not held to as high a degree of proof as the plaintiff in a personal injury action (Noseworthy v City of New York, 298 NY 76), plaintiff is still obliged to provide some proof from which negligence could reasonably be inferred (see, Wright v New York City Hous. Auth., 208 AD2d 327). Here, plaintiff’s opposition consists mainly of a repetition of the allegations contained in the complaint—namely that the decedent had fallen down a set of stairs in a building owned and operated by defendant Kramer, and that this fall was caused by defendant’s negligence. Such is not sufficient opposition to defendant’s motion for summary judgment (see, Abish v Cetta, 155 AD2d 495), for only the existence of a bona fide issue raised by evidentiary facts "and not one based on conclusory or irrelevant allegations will suffice to defeat summary judgment” (Rotuba Extruders v Ceppos, 46 NY2d 223, 231). Concur—Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Tom and Andrias, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.), entered December 28, 1995, which granted defendant-respondent’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

While plaintiff is correct in noting that the plaintiff in a wrongful death action is not held to as high a degree of proof as the plaintiff in a personal injury action (Noseworthy v City of New York, 298 NY 76), plaintiff is still obliged to provide some proof from which negligence could reasonably be inferred (see, Wright v New York City Hous. Auth., 208 AD2d 327). Here, plaintiff’s opposition consists mainly of a repetition of the allegations contained in the complaint—namely that the decedent had fallen down a set of stairs in a building owned and operated by defendant Kramer, and that this fall was caused by defendant’s negligence. Such is not sufficient opposition to defendant’s motion for summary judgment (see, Abish v Cetta, 155 AD2d 495), for only the existence of a bona fide issue raised by evidentiary facts "and not one based on conclusory or irrelevant allegations will suffice to defeat summary judgment” (Rotuba Extruders v Ceppos, 46 NY2d 223, 231). Concur—Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Tom and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

236 A.D.2d 338, 654 N.Y.S.2d 19, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1658, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/black-v-loomis-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack