Gold v. Patel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gold v. Patel

123 A.D.2d 601, 506 N.Y.S.2d 666, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 60749

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

DecidedOctober 6, 1986

StatusPublished

This text of 123 A.D.2d 601 (Gold v. Patel) 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

Gold v. Patel, 123 A.D.2d 601, 506 N.Y.S.2d 666, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 60749 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

In a medical malpractice action, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, (1) from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J.), dated May 10, 1985, as denied their motion for summary judgment, and (2) from so much of an order of the same court, dated September 12, 1985, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination.

Appeal from the order dated May 10, 1985 dismissed. That order was superseded by the order dated September 12, 1985, made upon reargument.

Order dated September 12, 1985 affirmed insofar as appealed from.

The plaintiffs are awarded one bill of costs.

The denial of the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint was proper. The record clearly indicates that there are disputed factual issues which preclude summary determination. Bracken, J. P., Brown, Niehoff and Eiber, JJ., concur.

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

In a medical malpractice action, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, (1) from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J.), dated May 10, 1985, as denied their motion for summary judgment, and (2) from so much of an order of the same court, dated September 12, 1985, as, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination.

Appeal from the order dated May 10, 1985 dismissed. That order was superseded by the order dated September 12, 1985, made upon reargument.

Order dated September 12, 1985 affirmed insofar as appealed from.

The plaintiffs are awarded one bill of costs.

The denial of the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint was proper. The record clearly indicates that there are disputed factual issues which preclude summary determination. Bracken, J. P., Brown, Niehoff and Eiber, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

123 A.D.2d 601, 506 N.Y.S.2d 666, 1986 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 60749, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gold-v-patel-nyappdiv-1986.