Miller v. Ekiert

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Miller v. Ekiert

273 A.D.2d 887, 710 N.Y.S.2d 266, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6731

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

DecidedJune 16, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 273 A.D.2d 887 (Miller v. Ekiert) 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

Miller v. Ekiert, 273 A.D.2d 887, 710 N.Y.S.2d 266, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6731 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for injuries he sustained as the result of diving into Oneida Lake from the end of a dock on property owned by Antoinette Ekiert (defendant). Supreme Court properly granted the motion of defendant for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against her. Defendant submitted proof establishing that “the sole legal cause of plaintiffs injuries was [plaintiffs] own reckless conduct in attempting that dive” (Olsen v Town of Richfield, 81 NY2d 1024, 1026; see, Lionarons v General Elec. Co., 215 AD2d 851, 852-853, affd 86 NY2d 832; Butler v Marshall, 243 AD2d 971, 973), and plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Oswego County, McCarthy, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Green, Kehoe and Lawton, JJ.

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

Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for injuries he sustained as the result of diving into Oneida Lake from the end of a dock on property owned by Antoinette Ekiert (defendant). Supreme Court properly granted the motion of defendant for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against her. Defendant submitted proof establishing that “the sole legal cause of plaintiffs injuries was [plaintiffs] own reckless conduct in attempting that dive” (Olsen v Town of Richfield, 81 NY2d 1024, 1026; see, Lionarons v General Elec. Co., 215 AD2d 851, 852-853, affd 86 NY2d 832; Butler v Marshall, 243 AD2d 971, 973), and plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Oswego County, McCarthy, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Pigott, Jr., P. J., Green, Kehoe and Lawton, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

273 A.D.2d 887, 710 N.Y.S.2d 266, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6731, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miller-v-ekiert-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack