Nam Jin Chung v. M & S Deli

293 A.D.2d 725, 741 N.Y.S.2d 436, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4158

This text of 293 A.D.2d 725 (Nam Jin Chung v. M & S Deli) 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
Nam Jin Chung v. M & S Deli, 293 A.D.2d 725, 741 N.Y.S.2d 436, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4158 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for wrongful death, the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of (1) an order of the [726]*726Supreme Court, Kangs County (Knipel, J.), dated December 14, 2000, as granted the motion of the defendants Harold Heckler, Seymour Levine, and Arthur Susnow for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them, and (2) an order of the same court, dated March 16, 2001, as, upon reargument, adhered to the prior determination.

Ordered that the appeal from the order dated December 14, 2000, is dismissed, as that order was superseded by the order dated March 16, 2001, made upon reargument; and it is further,

Ordered that the order dated March 16, 2000, is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondents are awarded one bill of costs.

The defendants Harold Meckler, Seymour Levine, and Arthur Susnow submitted sufficient evidence demonstrating their entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them (see Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557; Davis v New York City Hous. Auth., 272 AD2d 365; Hecht v Vanderbilt Assoc., 141 AD2d 696). In opposition, the plaintiffs failed to present sufficient evidence in admissible form to raise a triable issue of fact (see Zuckerman v City of New York, supra; Byrd v New York City Tr. Auth., 228 AD2d 537). Feuerstein, J.P., S. Miller, Krausman and Cozier, JJ., concur.

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)
Hecht v. Vanderbilt Associates
141 A.D.2d 696 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1988)
Byrd v. New York City Transit Authority
228 A.D.2d 537 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)
Davis v. New York City Housing Authority
272 A.D.2d 365 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
293 A.D.2d 725, 741 N.Y.S.2d 436, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4158, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nam-jin-chung-v-m-s-deli-nyappdiv-2002.