Perna v. Ellner

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Perna v. Ellner

262 A.D.2d 620, 691 N.Y.S.2d 895, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7642

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

DecidedJune 28, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 262 A.D.2d 620 (Perna v. Ellner) 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

Perna v. Ellner, 262 A.D.2d 620, 691 N.Y.S.2d 895, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7642 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for injury to property, the defendant Ethan [621]*621Ellner appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Nicolai, J.), entered July 21, 1998, as denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him.

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

Because the appellant failed to sustain his burden of proof on his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him, the motion was properly denied, regardless of the sufficiency of the plaintiffs opposing papers (see, Revelo v Weithorn, 253 AD2d 869; Hirsh v Bert’s Bikes & Sports, 227 AD2d 956). O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Joy, Altman and Smith, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for injury to property, the defendant Ethan [621]*621Ellner appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Nicolai, J.), entered July 21, 1998, as denied his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him.

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

Because the appellant failed to sustain his burden of proof on his motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him, the motion was properly denied, regardless of the sufficiency of the plaintiffs opposing papers (see, Revelo v Weithorn, 253 AD2d 869; Hirsh v Bert’s Bikes & Sports, 227 AD2d 956). O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Joy, Altman and Smith, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

262 A.D.2d 620, 691 N.Y.S.2d 895, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7642, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/perna-v-ellner-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack