Montclair v. Mario's Market, Inc.

155 A.D.2d 872

This text of 155 A.D.2d 872 (Montclair v. Mario's Market, Inc.) 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
Montclair v. Mario's Market, Inc., 155 A.D.2d 872 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Opinion

— Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs and motion denied. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting summary judgment dismissing the complaint. "[T]he proponent of a summary judgment motion must make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, tendering sufficient evidence to demonstrate the absence of any material issues of fact (Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Center, 64 NY2d 851, 853; Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562; Sillman v Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp., 3 NY2d 395, 404). Failure to make a prima facie showing requires a denial of the motion, regardless of the sufficiency of the opposing papers (Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Center, supra, at p 853)” (Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324). (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Hayes, J. — summary judgment.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Denman, Pine, Balio and Lawton, JJ.

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

Related

Sillman v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp.
144 N.E.2d 387 (New York Court of Appeals, 1957)
Zuckerman v. City of New York
404 N.E.2d 718 (New York Court of Appeals, 1980)
Winegrad v. New York University Medical Center
476 N.E.2d 642 (New York Court of Appeals, 1985)
Alvarez v. Prospect Hospital
501 N.E.2d 572 (New York Court of Appeals, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
155 A.D.2d 872, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/montclair-v-marios-market-inc-nyappdiv-1989.