Lichtenstein v. Congregation Bais Yisroel
This text of 41 A.D.3d 437 (Lichtenstein v. Congregation Bais Yisroel) 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 an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the second third-party defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Partnow, J.), dated March 7, 2006, which denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the second third-party complaint.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the defendant third-party plaintiff/ second third-party plaintiff, Congregation Bais Yisroel (hereinafter the Congregation), as the nonmoving party (see Ogletree v Rush Realty Assoc., LLC, 29 AD3d 875 [2006]), the second third-party defendant, Herman Leimzider, failed to establish his entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the second third-party complaint seeking common-law indemni fication and contribution (see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]). Leimzider’s failure to make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law required denial of his motion, regardless of the sufficiency of the Congregation’s opposition papers (id.; see Baillargeon v Kings County Waterproofing Corp., 29 AD3d 838, 839 [2006]).
Leimzider’s remaining contentions are without merit. Rivera, J.P., Goldstein, Dillon and Carni, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
41 A.D.3d 437, 835 N.Y.S.2d 913, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lichtenstein-v-congregation-bais-yisroel-nyappdiv-2007.