Brandoff v. City of New York
This text of 229 A.D.2d 415 (Brandoff v. City of New York) 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.
Opinion
—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal (1) from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Price, J.), dated June 21, 1995, which granted the motion of the defendants Oscar G. Korte, Jr., and Karen Kisler for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them and (2), as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the same court, dated September 1, 1995, as, upon granting renewal, adhered to the original determination.
Ordered that the appeal from the order dated June 21,1995, is dismissed, as that order was superseded by the order dated September 1, 1995, made upon renewal; and it is further,
Ordered that the order dated September 1, 1995, is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,
Ordered that the respondents are awarded one bill of costs.
The only new evidence submitted upon the plaintiffs’ renewed motion, an affidavit prepared by the plaintiffs’ expert, was based solely on speculation and surmise and was therefore insufficient to defeat the motion for summary judgment (see, Laurent v Logan Bus Co., 215 AD2d 730).
The plaintiffs’ remaining contentions are without merit. Mangano, P. J., Thompson, Florio, McGinity and Luciano, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
229 A.D.2d 415, 644 N.Y.S.2d 908, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7680, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brandoff-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1996.