Dominguez v. DiMasi
This text of 15 A.D.3d 527 (Dominguez v. DiMasi) 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 re[528]*528cover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Price, J.), dated February 17, 2004, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
In support of their motion for summary judgment, the defendants failed to make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]; Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]). Questions of fact exist as to whether the defendants were negligent and, if so, whether their negligence was a proximate cause of the injuries allegedly sustained by the plaintiff Alicia Campis Dominguez (see Carew v Urological Surgeons of Long Is., 292 AD2d 484 [2002]).
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
The defendants’ remaining contention is without merit. Krausman, J.E, Mastro, Rivera and Skelos, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
15 A.D.3d 527, 789 N.Y.S.2d 898, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1800, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dominguez-v-dimasi-nyappdiv-2005.