Leo v. I.S.J. Management Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Leo v. I.S.J. Management Corp.

268 A.D.2d 566, 702 N.Y.S.2d 854, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 947

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

DecidedJanuary 31, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 268 A.D.2d 566 (Leo v. I.S.J. Management Corp.) 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

Leo v. I.S.J. Management Corp., 268 A.D.2d 566, 702 N.Y.S.2d 854, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 947 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant I.S.J. Management Corp. appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Barasch, J.), dated March 24, 1999, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied the motion for summary judgment, as the defendant Pizza Hut of America, Inc., produced proof in admissible form demonstrating the existence of a factual issue as to the location at which the plaintiff fell (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557). Thompson, J. P., S. Miller, Krausman, Florio and Schmidt, 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, etc., the defendant I.S.J. Management Corp. appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Barasch, J.), dated March 24, 1999, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied the motion for summary judgment, as the defendant Pizza Hut of America, Inc., produced proof in admissible form demonstrating the existence of a factual issue as to the location at which the plaintiff fell (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557). Thompson, J. P., S. Miller, Krausman, Florio and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

268 A.D.2d 566, 702 N.Y.S.2d 854, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 947, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/leo-v-isj-management-corp-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack