Pallas v. Guntupalli

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Pallas v. Guntupalli

195 A.D.2d 1002, 602 N.Y.S.2d 571

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 16, 1993·Published

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Although defendants made a prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment as a matter of law, the physician’s affidavit submitted by plaintiff in response raised a triable issue of fact (see generally, Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324-325). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Gossel, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Lawton, Boomer and Boehm, JJ.

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

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Although defendants made a prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment as a matter of law, the physician’s affidavit submitted by plaintiff in response raised a triable issue of fact (see generally, Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324-325). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Gossel, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Lawton, Boomer and Boehm, JJ.

Pallas v. Guntupalli, 195 A.D.2d 1002, 602 N.Y.S.2d 571 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

195 A.D.2d 1002 (Pallas v. Guntupalli) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related