Pena v. Goody's Spanish Food & More

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Pena v. Goody's Spanish Food & More

22 A.D.3d 820, 804 N.Y.S.2d 748

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

DecidedOctober 31, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 22 A.D.3d 820 (Pena v. Goody's Spanish Food & More) 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

Pena v. Goody's Spanish Food & More, 22 A.D.3d 820, 804 N.Y.S.2d 748 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Golar, J.), dated April 28, 2004, which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The defendants met their initial burden of submitting evidence sufficient to establish their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320 [1986]). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to submit evidence in admissible form to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the defendants breached their duty to maintain their premises in a reasonably safe manner (see Basso v Miller, 40 NY2d 233 [1976]). Adams, J.P., Luciano, Mastro and Skelos, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Golar, J.), dated April 28, 2004, which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The defendants met their initial burden of submitting evidence sufficient to establish their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320 [1986]). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to submit evidence in admissible form to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether the defendants breached their duty to maintain their premises in a reasonably safe manner (see Basso v Miller, 40 NY2d 233 [1976]). Adams, J.P., Luciano, Mastro and Skelos, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

22 A.D.3d 820, 804 N.Y.S.2d 748, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pena-v-goodys-spanish-food-more-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack