Sexton v. United States Golf Assn.

139 A.D.3d 1037, 30 N.Y.S.3d 837
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 25, 2016
Docket2014-10696
StatusPublished

This text of 139 A.D.3d 1037 (Sexton v. United States Golf Assn.) 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
Sexton v. United States Golf Assn., 139 A.D.3d 1037, 30 N.Y.S.3d 837 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

*1038 In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Sher, J.), entered September 17, 2014, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff was walking, as a spectator, on the Bethpage Black golf course during a practice round for the U.S. Open Golf Championship, when she allegedly fell down a slope located on the right side of the ninth hole fairway. Thereafter, the plaintiff commenced the instant action against the defendant, United States Golf Association, to recover damages for personal injuries. The defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint. The Supreme Court granted the motion. The plaintiff appeals.

In support of its motion, the defendant demonstrated its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting, inter alia, a transcript of the plaintiff’s deposition testimony, which demonstrated that she was unable to identify the cause of her fall (see McRae v Venuto, 136 AD3d 765, 766 [2016]; O’Connor v Metro Mgt. Dev., Inc., 130 AD3d 698, 700 [2015]; Montemarano v Sodexo, Inc., 121 AD3d 1059, 1060 [2014]; Izaguirre v New York City Tr. Auth., 106 AD3d 878, 878-879 [2013]). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint.

Chambers, J.P., Dickerson, Hinds-Radix and Connolly, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Montemarano v. Sodexo, Inc.
121 A.D.3d 1059 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
O'Connor v. Metro Management Development, Inc.
130 A.D.3d 698 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
McRae v. Venuto
136 A.D.3d 765 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
139 A.D.3d 1037, 30 N.Y.S.3d 837, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sexton-v-united-states-golf-assn-nyappdiv-2016.