Calli v. Forest View Center for Rehabilitation & Nursing, Inc.
This text of 91 A.D.3d 898 (Calli v. Forest View Center for Rehabilitation & Nursing, Inc.) 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
[899]*899The defendants Forest View Center for Rehabilitation and Nursing, Inc. (hereinafter Forest View), and Precision Health, Inc., doing business as Medfax Portable Diagnostics (hereinafter Precision Health), each demonstrated their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against each of them (see McLoughlin v Suffolk Obstetrics & Gynecology, LLP, 85 AD3d 984, 985 [2011]; Stukas v Streiter, 83 AD3d 18 [2011]; Breland v Jamaica Hosp. Med. Ctr., 49 AD3d 789, 790 [2008]). In opposition, the plaintiffs submissions, including the conclusory affirmation of his expert, were insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 325 [1986]; Ahmed v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., 84 AD3d 709, 710 [2011]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of Forest View’s motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it, and should have granted that branch of Precision Health’s cross motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it. Balkin, J.P, Leventhal, Belen and Roman, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
91 A.D.3d 898, 937 N.Y.2d 606, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/calli-v-forest-view-center-for-rehabilitation-nursing-inc-nyappdiv-2012.