Siegel v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Siegel v. City of New York

39 A.D.2d 598, 331 N.Y.S.2d 970, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4936

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

DecidedApril 17, 1972

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 39 A.D.2d 598 (Siegel v. City of New York) 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

Siegel v. City of New York, 39 A.D.2d 598, 331 N.Y.S.2d 970, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4936 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

In a medical malpractice action to recover damages for wrongful death and conscious pain and suffering, defendants Kalkstein and Weininger appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated November 8, 1971, as denied their motion to sever the action as to them and grant summary judgment in their favor. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion for severance of action and summary judgment granted. The motion for summary judgment is supported by affidavits and a deposition in an examination before trial showing that appellants’ decedent was never the physician of plaintiff’s wife. It was then mandatory upon plaintiff to submit evidentiary facts or materials, by affidavit or otherwise, rebutting the prima facie showing that the decedent was not the physician of plaintiff’s wife and demonstrating the existence of a triable issue of fact. The affidavit by the attorney for plaintiff setting forth certain conelusory statements is not sufficient to defeat the motion for summary judgment (Indig v. Finkelstein, 23 N Y 2d 728). Rabin, P. J., Munder, Martuseello, Latham and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

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

In a medical malpractice action to recover damages for wrongful death and conscious pain and suffering, defendants Kalkstein and Weininger appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, dated November 8, 1971, as denied their motion to sever the action as to them and grant summary judgment in their favor. Order reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with $10 costs and disbursements, and motion for severance of action and summary judgment granted. The motion for summary judgment is supported by affidavits and a deposition in an examination before trial showing that appellants’ decedent was never the physician of plaintiff’s wife. It was then mandatory upon plaintiff to submit evidentiary facts or materials, by affidavit or otherwise, rebutting the prima facie showing that the decedent was not the physician of plaintiff’s wife and demonstrating the existence of a triable issue of fact. The affidavit by the attorney for plaintiff setting forth certain conelusory statements is not sufficient to defeat the motion for summary judgment (Indig v. Finkelstein, 23 N Y 2d 728). Rabin, P. J., Munder, Martuseello, Latham and Benjamin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 A.D.2d 598, 331 N.Y.S.2d 970, 1972 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4936, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/siegel-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack