Richards v. Wong

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Richards v. Wong

272 A.D.2d 598, 708 N.Y.S.2d 626, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6047

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

DecidedMay 30, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 272 A.D.2d 598 (Richards v. Wong) 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

Richards v. Wong, 272 A.D.2d 598, 708 N.Y.S.2d 626, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6047 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant Welbilt Corporation appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Price, J.), dated June 21, 1999, as denied that branch of its motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the cause of action to recover damages based on common-law negligence insofar as asserted against it.

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

The defendant Welbilt Corporation did not meet its initial burden of setting forth evidentiary facts sufficient to establish its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the cause of action to recover damages based on common-law negligence insofar as asserted against it. Thus, the Supreme Court properly denied that branch of its motion (see, Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320; CPLR 3212 [b]). Thompson, J. P., Friedmann, Florio and Smith, 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, etc., the defendant Welbilt Corporation appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Price, J.), dated June 21, 1999, as denied that branch of its motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the cause of action to recover damages based on common-law negligence insofar as asserted against it.

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

The defendant Welbilt Corporation did not meet its initial burden of setting forth evidentiary facts sufficient to establish its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the cause of action to recover damages based on common-law negligence insofar as asserted against it. Thus, the Supreme Court properly denied that branch of its motion (see, Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320; CPLR 3212 [b]). Thompson, J. P., Friedmann, Florio and Smith, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

272 A.D.2d 598, 708 N.Y.S.2d 626, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6047, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richards-v-wong-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack