McIntyre v. East Nassau Medical Group, P. C.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

McIntyre v. East Nassau Medical Group, P. C.

275 A.D.2d 398, 712 N.Y.S.2d 874, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8807

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

DecidedAugust 21, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 275 A.D.2d 398 (McIntyre v. East Nassau Medical Group, P. C.) 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

McIntyre v. East Nassau Medical Group, P. C., 275 A.D.2d 398, 712 N.Y.S.2d 874, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8807 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants Carl B. Weiss and Nassau Orthopedic Surgeons, P. C., appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.), entered July 2, 1999, as denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The plaintiffs raised a triable issue of fact in opposition to the prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment by the moving defendants, and the motion was therefore properly denied (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557). The conflicting expert opinions presented in the opposing affidavits raised a triable issue of material fact for a jury (see, Kallenberg v Beth Israel Hosp., 45 AD2d 177, affd 37 NY2d 719). S. Miller, J. P., Friedmann, Luciano 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 defendants Carl B. Weiss and Nassau Orthopedic Surgeons, P. C., appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (DiNoto, J.), entered July 2, 1999, as denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The plaintiffs raised a triable issue of fact in opposition to the prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment by the moving defendants, and the motion was therefore properly denied (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557). The conflicting expert opinions presented in the opposing affidavits raised a triable issue of material fact for a jury (see, Kallenberg v Beth Israel Hosp., 45 AD2d 177, affd 37 NY2d 719). S. Miller, J. P., Friedmann, Luciano and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

275 A.D.2d 398, 712 N.Y.S.2d 874, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8807, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcintyre-v-east-nassau-medical-group-p-c-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack