Mamidou Barry v. Christopher C. Lee
This text of Mamidou Barry v. Christopher C. Lee (Mamidou Barry v. Christopher C. Lee) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
State of New York Court of Appeals This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York Reports.
No. 82 SSM 12
Mamidou Barry, &c., Respondent, v. Christopher C. Lee, &c., et al., Appellants.
Submitted by Judy C. Selmeci, for appellants. Submitted by Stanley A. Landers, for respondent.
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules, order affirmed, with costs, and certified question answered in the affirmative. Plaintiff’s submissions rebutted defendants’ prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment and raised triable issues of fact. On this record, triable questions of fact preclude summary judgment in favor of defendants. Judges Rivera, Stein, Fahey, Wilson and Feinman concur. Chief Judge DiFiore and Judge Garcia dissent for reasons stated in the dissenting opinion of Justice Anil C. Singh at the Appellate Division (see Barry v Lee, 180 AD3d 103, 108-114 [2019] [Singh, J., dissenting]).
Decided September 1, 2020
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Mamidou Barry v. Christopher C. Lee, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mamidou-barry-v-christopher-c-lee-ny-2020.