Giancaspro v. Held

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Giancaspro v. Held

261 A.D.2d 576, 688 N.Y.S.2d 918, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5668

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

DecidedMay 24, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 261 A.D.2d 576 (Giancaspro v. Held) 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

Giancaspro v. Held, 261 A.D.2d 576, 688 N.Y.S.2d 918, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5668 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cohalan, J.), dated March 13, 1998, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint inasmuch as the defendant is not the owner of the property where the injured plaintiff allegedly slipped and fell. The plaintiffs’ contentions on appeal are either unpreserved for appellate review (see, Gross v Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 240 AD2d 468) or without merit. S. Miller, J. P., Ritter, Altman and H. Miller, 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, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cohalan, J.), dated March 13, 1998, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint inasmuch as the defendant is not the owner of the property where the injured plaintiff allegedly slipped and fell. The plaintiffs’ contentions on appeal are either unpreserved for appellate review (see, Gross v Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 240 AD2d 468) or without merit. S. Miller, J. P., Ritter, Altman and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 A.D.2d 576, 688 N.Y.S.2d 918, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5668, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/giancaspro-v-held-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack