Davis-Sinclair v. Amsi Investors

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Davis-Sinclair v. Amsi Investors

289 A.D.2d 521, 735 N.Y.S.2d 783, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13091

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

DecidedDecember 31, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 289 A.D.2d 521 (Davis-Sinclair v. Amsi Investors) 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

Davis-Sinclair v. Amsi Investors, 289 A.D.2d 521, 735 N.Y.S.2d 783, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13091 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

In a consolidated action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff Letisse Selamawet appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Golar, J.), dated April 4, 2001, as granted that branch of the defendants’ motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted by her.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendants’ motion [522]*522for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted by the appellant (see, Donohue v Seaman’s Furniture Corp., 270 AD2d 451; Cayo v Supermarkets Gen. Corp., 247 AD2d 421; Howard-Seay v Dorchester Towers Assocs., 227 AD2d 525). Krausman, J. P., Luciano, Smith, Adams and Prudenti, JJ., concur.

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

In a consolidated action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff Letisse Selamawet appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Golar, J.), dated April 4, 2001, as granted that branch of the defendants’ motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted by her.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendants’ motion [522]*522for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted by the appellant (see, Donohue v Seaman’s Furniture Corp., 270 AD2d 451; Cayo v Supermarkets Gen. Corp., 247 AD2d 421; Howard-Seay v Dorchester Towers Assocs., 227 AD2d 525). Krausman, J. P., Luciano, Smith, Adams and Prudenti, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

289 A.D.2d 521, 735 N.Y.S.2d 783, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13091, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-sinclair-v-amsi-investors-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack