Delipetros v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Delipetros v. New York City Transit Authority

264 A.D.2d 754, 696 N.Y.S.2d 413, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9153

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

DecidedSeptember 20, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 264 A.D.2d 754 (Delipetros v. New York City Transit Authority) 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

Delipetros v. New York City Transit Authority, 264 A.D.2d 754, 696 N.Y.S.2d 413, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9153 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Schmidt, J.), dated May 14, 1998, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the defendant’s motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

The defendant made out a prima facie case entitling it to summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Since the plaintiff failed to “demonstrate * * * the existence of a factual issue requiring a trial of the action or tender an acceptable excuse for [her] failure to do so” (Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 560), the motion should have been granted (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, supra). Ritter, J. P., Altman, Krausman and Florio, 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 defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Schmidt, J.), dated May 14, 1998, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the defendant’s motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

The defendant made out a prima facie case entitling it to summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Since the plaintiff failed to “demonstrate * * * the existence of a factual issue requiring a trial of the action or tender an acceptable excuse for [her] failure to do so” (Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 560), the motion should have been granted (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, supra). Ritter, J. P., Altman, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

264 A.D.2d 754, 696 N.Y.S.2d 413, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9153, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/delipetros-v-new-york-city-transit-authority-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack