Kenedics v. Ribolo
49 A.D.3d 820, 853 N.Y.2d 903
Opinion
In support of her motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against her, the defendant Irina Kravis made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see generally Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320 [1986]). However, in opposition to the motion, the plaintiff raised triable issues of fact (see id.; Fontecchio v Esposito, 108 AD2d 780 [1985]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court correctly denied the defendant’s motion. Prudenti, P.J., Skelos, Miller, Covello and McCarthy, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Kenedics v. Ribolo, 49 A.D.3d 820, 853 N.Y.2d 903 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).
49 A.D.3d 820 (Kenedics v. Ribolo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Alvarez v. Prospect Hospital
501 N.E.2d 572 (New York Court of Appeals, 1986)
Fontecchio v. Esposito
108 A.D.2d 780 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1985)