Matsyuk v. Konkalipos
This text of 35 A.D.3d 675 (Matsyuk v. Konkalipos) 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, the defendant Tatyana Tsipenyuk appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hurkin-Torres, J.), dated September 9, 2005, which denied her motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against her.
[676]*676Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The Supreme Court properly denied the appellant’s motion for summary judgment because the papers she submitted in support of her motion failed to include copies of all of the pleadings in the action as required by CPLR 3212 (b) (see Wider v Heller, 24 AD3d 433 [2005]; Sted Tenants Owners Corp. v Chumpitaz, 5 AD3d 663 [2004]; Hamilton v City of New York, 262 AD2d 283 [1999]; Deer Park Assoc. v Robbins Store, 243 AD2d 443 [1997]; Lawlor v County of Nassau, 166 AD2d 692 [1990]). Prudenti, P.J., Krausman, Mastro and Rivera, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
35 A.D.3d 675, 824 N.Y.S.2d 918, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matsyuk-v-konkalipos-nyappdiv-2006.