Hughes v. De Chang Zheng

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hughes v. De Chang Zheng

295 A.D.2d 477, 744 N.Y.S.2d 346, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6447

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

DecidedJune 17, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 295 A.D.2d 477 (Hughes v. De Chang Zheng) 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

Hughes v. De Chang Zheng, 295 A.D.2d 477, 744 N.Y.S.2d 346, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6447 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated June 28, 2001, which granted the motion of [478]*478the defendant John Capogna for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him, and denied the plaintiffs cross motion for leave to amend his verified bill of particulars.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

There being no issues of fact, the Supreme Court properly granted the respondent’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him.

The plaintiffs remaining contentions are without merit. Florio, J.P., O’Brien, Krausman and Luciano, 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, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated June 28, 2001, which granted the motion of [478]*478the defendant John Capogna for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him, and denied the plaintiffs cross motion for leave to amend his verified bill of particulars.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

There being no issues of fact, the Supreme Court properly granted the respondent’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him.

The plaintiffs remaining contentions are without merit. Florio, J.P., O’Brien, Krausman and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

295 A.D.2d 477, 744 N.Y.S.2d 346, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6447, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hughes-v-de-chang-zheng-nyappdiv-2002.