Scanlon v. Long Beach Public Schools

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Scanlon v. Long Beach Public Schools

197 A.D.2d 567, 602 N.Y.S.2d 640, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9172

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

DecidedOctober 12, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 197 A.D.2d 567 (Scanlon v. Long Beach Public Schools) 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

Scanlon v. Long Beach Public Schools, 197 A.D.2d 567, 602 N.Y.S.2d 640, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9172 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants William J. Mallahan and Matthew J. Mallahan appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (McCabe, J.), dated July 3, 1991, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

To defeat a motion for summary judgment, the opposing party must show facts sufficient to require a trial and must make that showing by evidentiary proof in admissible form (see, Friends of Animals v Associated Fur Mfrs., 46 NY2d 1065, 1067; Spearmon v Times Sq. Stores Corp., 96 AD2d 552). That the plaintiff Ellen Scanlon and the defendants Long Beach Public Schools and James Jones placed their proof before the court by way of annexing deposition testimony and documentary evidence to their attorneys’ affirmations did not render their opposition papers defective (see, Olan v Farrell Lines, 64 NY2d 1092, 1093; Watford v Jack LaLanne Long Is., 151 AD2d 742). Further, sufficient issues of fact have been raised to warrant the denial of summary judgment (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562; Spearmon v Times Sq. Stores Corp., supra). Bracken, J. P., Balletta, Eiber and Copertino, 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 defendants William J. Mallahan and Matthew J. Mallahan appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (McCabe, J.), dated July 3, 1991, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

To defeat a motion for summary judgment, the opposing party must show facts sufficient to require a trial and must make that showing by evidentiary proof in admissible form (see, Friends of Animals v Associated Fur Mfrs., 46 NY2d 1065, 1067; Spearmon v Times Sq. Stores Corp., 96 AD2d 552). That the plaintiff Ellen Scanlon and the defendants Long Beach Public Schools and James Jones placed their proof before the court by way of annexing deposition testimony and documentary evidence to their attorneys’ affirmations did not render their opposition papers defective (see, Olan v Farrell Lines, 64 NY2d 1092, 1093; Watford v Jack LaLanne Long Is., 151 AD2d 742). Further, sufficient issues of fact have been raised to warrant the denial of summary judgment (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562; Spearmon v Times Sq. Stores Corp., supra). Bracken, J. P., Balletta, Eiber and Copertino, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

197 A.D.2d 567, 602 N.Y.S.2d 640, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9172, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scanlon-v-long-beach-public-schools-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack