Melendez v. Majeed

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Melendez v. Majeed

292 A.D.2d 354, 738 N.Y.S.2d 606, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2238

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

DecidedMarch 4, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 292 A.D.2d 354 (Melendez v. Majeed) 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

Melendez v. Majeed, 292 A.D.2d 354, 738 N.Y.S.2d 606, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2238 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Abdul Majeed appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Flug, J.), dated November 1, 2000, as denied his mo[355]*355tion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against him, and the defendant Egg Roll King cross appeals from so much of the same order as denied its cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed and cross-appealed from, with one bill of costs.

There are triable issues of fact requiring the denial of summary judgment (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557). Feuerstein, J.P., Krausman, Schmidt and Cozier, 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, the defendant Abdul Majeed appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Flug, J.), dated November 1, 2000, as denied his mo[355]*355tion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against him, and the defendant Egg Roll King cross appeals from so much of the same order as denied its cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed and cross-appealed from, with one bill of costs.

There are triable issues of fact requiring the denial of summary judgment (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557). Feuerstein, J.P., Krausman, Schmidt and Cozier, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

292 A.D.2d 354, 738 N.Y.S.2d 606, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2238, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/melendez-v-majeed-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack