Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/Horne v. Mr. John

Horne v. Mr. John

68 A.D.3d 722, 888 N.Y.2d 903
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 1, 2009
StatusPublished

This text of 68 A.D.3d 722 (Horne v. Mr. John) 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
Horne v. Mr. John, 68 A.D.3d 722, 888 N.Y.2d 903 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Opinion

In moving for summary judgment, the defendants bore the initial burden of establishing their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]). The Supreme Court properly concluded that the defendants failed to meet that burden. Since the defendants did not meet their prima facie burden, it is unnecessary to consider the adequacy of the opposing papers (see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851 [1985]; Gestetner v Teitelbaum, 52 AD3d 778 [2008]). Mastro, J.P., Balkin, Eng and Leventhal, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Zuckerman v. City of New York
404 N.E.2d 718 (New York Court of Appeals, 1980)
Winegrad v. New York University Medical Center
476 N.E.2d 642 (New York Court of Appeals, 1985)
Gestetner v. Teitelbaum
52 A.D.3d 778 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
68 A.D.3d 722, 888 N.Y.2d 903, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/horne-v-mr-john-nyappdiv-2009.