Kominakos v. Lioudis
This text of 88 A.D.3d 657 (Kominakos v. Lioudis) 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.
Opinion
In support of his motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability, the plaintiff failed to make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]; Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]). Since the plaintiff failed to meet his initial burden as the movant, we need not review the sufficiency of the defendant’s opposition papers (see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability. Prudenti, EJ., Rivera, Austin and Roman, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
88 A.D.3d 657, 930 N.Y.2d 472, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kominakos-v-lioudis-nyappdiv-2011.