Jump v. Niederman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jump v. Niederman

276 A.D.2d 594, 714 N.Y.S.2d 901, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10418

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

DecidedOctober 16, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 276 A.D.2d 594 (Jump v. Niederman) 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

Jump v. Niederman, 276 A.D.2d 594, 714 N.Y.S.2d 901, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10418 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rappaport, J.), entered August 12, 1999, which, upon an order of the same court, dated June 8, 1999, granting the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, is in favor of the defendants and against her, dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

As the plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact in opposition to the defendants’ prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment to the defendants (see, CPLR 3212 [b]; [595]*595Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562). Altman, J. P., Goldstein, McGinity 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 a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Rappaport, J.), entered August 12, 1999, which, upon an order of the same court, dated June 8, 1999, granting the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, is in favor of the defendants and against her, dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

As the plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact in opposition to the defendants’ prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment to the defendants (see, CPLR 3212 [b]; [595]*595Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562). Altman, J. P., Goldstein, McGinity and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

276 A.D.2d 594, 714 N.Y.S.2d 901, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10418, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jump-v-niederman-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack