Foster v. Clifford

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Foster v. Clifford

266 A.D.2d 879, 698 N.Y.S.2d 204, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11834

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

DecidedNovember 12, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 266 A.D.2d 879 (Foster v. Clifford) 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

Foster v. Clifford, 266 A.D.2d 879, 698 N.Y.S.2d 204, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11834 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order and judgment unanimously reversed on the law with costs, motion denied and complaint reinstated. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The proponent of a motion for summary judgment has the burden to "make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, tendering sufficient evidence to eliminate any material issues of fact from the case” (Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 853). Defendant failed to establish that it did not violate Hornell City Code § 267-5 or that, even if it did violate that provision, such violation was not a cause of the accident. Thus, defendant failed to meet its burden. (Appeal from Order and Judgment of Supreme Court, Steuben County, Scudder, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Lawton, J. P., Hayes, Pigott, Jr., Hurlbutt and Balio, JJ.

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

—Order and judgment unanimously reversed on the law with costs, motion denied and complaint reinstated. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The proponent of a motion for summary judgment has the burden to "make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, tendering sufficient evidence to eliminate any material issues of fact from the case” (Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 853). Defendant failed to establish that it did not violate Hornell City Code § 267-5 or that, even if it did violate that provision, such violation was not a cause of the accident. Thus, defendant failed to meet its burden. (Appeal from Order and Judgment of Supreme Court, Steuben County, Scudder, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Lawton, J. P., Hayes, Pigott, Jr., Hurlbutt and Balio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

266 A.D.2d 879, 698 N.Y.S.2d 204, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11834, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/foster-v-clifford-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack