Park v. Ferragamo

282 A.D.2d 588, 723 N.Y.S.2d 378, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3836
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 16, 2001·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Pagones, J.), dated May 1, 2000, as denied that branch of his cross motion which was for summary judgment on the issue of liability pursuant to Labor Law § 240 (1).

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied that branch of the plaintiffs cross motion which was for summary judgment on the issue of liability pursuant to Labor Law § 240 (1) because there are questions of fact as to how the accident occurred (see, Castronovo v Doe, 274 AD2d 442; Avendano v Sazerac, Inc., 248 AD2d 340). Santucci, J. P., Altman, Luciano and H. Miller, JJ., concur.

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

Park v. Ferragamo, 282 A.D.2d 588, 723 N.Y.S.2d 378, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3836 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

282 A.D.2d 588 (Park v. Ferragamo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Zalewski v. MH Residential 1, LLC
2018 NY Slip Op 5356 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Kamolov v. BIA Group, LLC
79 A.D.3d 1101 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
McGovern v. St. Patrick's Church
8 A.D.3d 538 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)