Jones v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jones v. City of New York

150 A.D.2d 757, 542 N.Y.S.2d 208, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7256

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

DecidedMay 30, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 150 A.D.2d 757 (Jones v. City of New York) 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

Jones v. City of New York, 150 A.D.2d 757, 542 N.Y.S.2d 208, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7256 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

In a consolidated negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant New York City Housing Authority appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vinik, J.), dated January 27, 1988, as denied its motion for summary judgment.

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

[758]*758The affidavit of an appraisal officer employed by the New York City Housing Authority was insufficient to establish the Authority’s entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see, Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Center, 64 NY2d 851). Thus we need not reach the issue of the sufficiency of the papers submitted in opposition to the Authority’s motion for summary judgment. Brown, J. P., Lawrence, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.

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

In a consolidated negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant New York City Housing Authority appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vinik, J.), dated January 27, 1988, as denied its motion for summary judgment.

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

[758]*758The affidavit of an appraisal officer employed by the New York City Housing Authority was insufficient to establish the Authority’s entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see, Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Center, 64 NY2d 851). Thus we need not reach the issue of the sufficiency of the papers submitted in opposition to the Authority’s motion for summary judgment. Brown, J. P., Lawrence, Kunzeman and Kooper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

150 A.D.2d 757, 542 N.Y.S.2d 208, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7256, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack