Gonzalez v. Mott Haven Associates Number Eight

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gonzalez v. Mott Haven Associates Number Eight

265 A.D.2d 377, 696 N.Y.S.2d 829, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10223

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 12, 1999·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages [378] for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jones, J.), entered June 16, 1998, which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and (2) an order of the same court, entered December 15, 1998, which denied their motion, in effect, for reargument.

Ordered that the appeal from the order dated December 15, 1998, is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as no appeal lies from an order denying reargument; and it is further,

Ordered that the order entered June 16, 1998, is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the motion for summary judgment is denied.

There are issues of fact as to whether the defendants had actual or constructive notice of the condition which allegedly caused the injuries to the plaintiff Billy Gonzalez, requiring the denial of summary judgment. Bracken, J. P., O’Brien, Santucci and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages [378] for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jones, J.), entered June 16, 1998, which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and (2) an order of the same court, entered December 15, 1998, which denied their motion, in effect, for reargument.

Ordered that the appeal from the order dated December 15, 1998, is dismissed, without costs or disbursements, as no appeal lies from an order denying reargument; and it is further,

Ordered that the order entered June 16, 1998, is reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the motion for summary judgment is denied.

There are issues of fact as to whether the defendants had actual or constructive notice of the condition which allegedly caused the injuries to the plaintiff Billy Gonzalez, requiring the denial of summary judgment. Bracken, J. P., O’Brien, Santucci and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Gonzalez v. Mott Haven Associates Number Eight, 265 A.D.2d 377, 696 N.Y.S.2d 829, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10223 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

265 A.D.2d 377 (Gonzalez v. Mott Haven Associates Number Eight) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related