Hamilton v. Jam Roc Cafe, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hamilton v. Jam Roc Cafe, Inc.

35 A.D.3d 365, 824 N.Y.S.2d 734

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

DecidedDecember 5, 2006

StatusPublished

This text of 35 A.D.3d 365 (Hamilton v. Jam Roc Cafe, Inc.) 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

Hamilton v. Jam Roc Cafe, Inc., 35 A.D.3d 365, 824 N.Y.S.2d 734 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rosengarten, J.), dated August 15, 2005, as denied that branch of its motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the causes of action based upon common-law negligence.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Under the circumstances of this case, the defendant failed to establish its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see CPLR 3212; Winegrad v New York Univ. Med Ctr., 64 NY2d 851 [1985]). Goldstein, J.P., Rivera, Spolzino and Skelos, 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 defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rosengarten, J.), dated August 15, 2005, as denied that branch of its motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the causes of action based upon common-law negligence.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

Under the circumstances of this case, the defendant failed to establish its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see CPLR 3212; Winegrad v New York Univ. Med Ctr., 64 NY2d 851 [1985]). Goldstein, J.P., Rivera, Spolzino and Skelos, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

35 A.D.3d 365, 824 N.Y.S.2d 734, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hamilton-v-jam-roc-cafe-inc-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack