Jones v. Gameray

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jones v. Gameray

153 A.D.2d 550, 544 N.Y.S.2d 209, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10678

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

DecidedAugust 7, 1989

StatusPublished

Cited by26 cases

This text of 153 A.D.2d 550 (Jones v. Gameray) 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. Gameray, 153 A.D.2d 550, 544 N.Y.S.2d 209, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10678 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Patsalos, J.), dated March 29, 1988, as granted the motion of the defendant Cecil Gameray for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against him.

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

[551]*551Once the defendant Cecil Gameray made a prima facie showing that he was entitled to summary judgment, the burden shifted to the plaintiff to produce sufficient evidentiary proof in admissible form to show that there indeed existed genuine triable issues of fact (see, Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324). This he failed to do. Bald, conclusory allegations, even if believable, are not enough to defeat a motion for summary judgment (see, Mayer v McBrunigan Constr. Corp., 105 AD2d 774). Moreover, under the circumstances of this case, the mere hope by the plaintiff that he might be able to uncover some evidence during the discovery process was insufficient to deny summary judgment to the defendant Gameray (see, CPLR 3212 [f]; Kennerly v Campbell Chain Co., 133 AD2d 669). Bracken, J. P., Kunzeman, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.

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

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County (Patsalos, J.), dated March 29, 1988, as granted the motion of the defendant Cecil Gameray for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against him.

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

[551]*551Once the defendant Cecil Gameray made a prima facie showing that he was entitled to summary judgment, the burden shifted to the plaintiff to produce sufficient evidentiary proof in admissible form to show that there indeed existed genuine triable issues of fact (see, Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324). This he failed to do. Bald, conclusory allegations, even if believable, are not enough to defeat a motion for summary judgment (see, Mayer v McBrunigan Constr. Corp., 105 AD2d 774). Moreover, under the circumstances of this case, the mere hope by the plaintiff that he might be able to uncover some evidence during the discovery process was insufficient to deny summary judgment to the defendant Gameray (see, CPLR 3212 [f]; Kennerly v Campbell Chain Co., 133 AD2d 669). Bracken, J. P., Kunzeman, Sullivan and Balletta, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

153 A.D.2d 550, 544 N.Y.S.2d 209, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10678, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-v-gameray-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack