Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/McFarland v. American Oxygen Co.

McFarland v. American Oxygen Co.

90 A.D.3d 866, 934 N.Y.2d 718
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 20, 2011
StatusPublished

This text of 90 A.D.3d 866 (McFarland v. American Oxygen Co.) 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
McFarland v. American Oxygen Co., 90 A.D.3d 866, 934 N.Y.2d 718 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Opinion

The Supreme Court properly denied that branch of the motion of the defendant Tri-Weld Industries, Inc. (hereinafter TriWeld), which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it by the plaintiff Jeffrey G. McFarland. In response to Tri-Weld’s prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320 [1986]), McFarland raised a triable issue of fact through the submission of his expert’s affidavit (see Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557 [1980]). Angiolillo, J.E, Hall, Austin and Miller, JJ., concur. [Prior Case History: 2010 NY Slip Op 3301KU).]

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Zuckerman v. City of New York
404 N.E.2d 718 (New York Court of Appeals, 1980)
Alvarez v. Prospect Hospital
501 N.E.2d 572 (New York Court of Appeals, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
90 A.D.3d 866, 934 N.Y.2d 718, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcfarland-v-american-oxygen-co-nyappdiv-2011.