Gordon v. General Electric Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gordon v. General Electric Co.

234 A.D.2d 418, 651 N.Y.S.2d 890, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13055

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

DecidedDecember 16, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 234 A.D.2d 418 (Gordon v. General Electric Co.) 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

Gordon v. General Electric Co., 234 A.D.2d 418, 651 N.Y.S.2d 890, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13055 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

—In a products liability action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J.), entered August 21, 1995, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The law is well settled that where, as here, a defendant [419]*419meets its initial burden of establishing its entitlement to summary judgment, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to "produce evidentiary proof in admissible form sufficient to require a trial of material questions of fact” (Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562; Reyes v Rentar Dev., 207 AD2d 336; Smith v Cafiero, 203 AD2d 355). The plaintiff failed to meet that burden. Ritter, J. P., Pizzuto, Santucci and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

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

—In a products liability action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Kramer, J.), entered August 21, 1995, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The law is well settled that where, as here, a defendant [419]*419meets its initial burden of establishing its entitlement to summary judgment, the burden shifts to the plaintiff to "produce evidentiary proof in admissible form sufficient to require a trial of material questions of fact” (Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562; Reyes v Rentar Dev., 207 AD2d 336; Smith v Cafiero, 203 AD2d 355). The plaintiff failed to meet that burden. Ritter, J. P., Pizzuto, Santucci and Friedmann, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

234 A.D.2d 418, 651 N.Y.S.2d 890, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13055, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gordon-v-general-electric-co-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack