Stafford v. Viacom, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Stafford v. Viacom, Inc.

32 A.D.3d 390, 818 N.Y.S.2d 782

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

DecidedAugust 1, 2006

StatusPublished

This text of 32 A.D.3d 390 (Stafford v. Viacom, Inc.) 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

Stafford v. Viacom, Inc., 32 A.D.3d 390, 818 N.Y.S.2d 782 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal [391]*391injuries, the third-party defendant SCS Systems, Ltd., appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kitzes, J.), dated April 15, 2005, which denied its motion, in effect, for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The facts relevant to this appeal are set forth in Stafford v Viacom, Inc., 32 AD3d 388 [2006] [decided herewith]).

The third-party defendant SCS Systems, Ltd. (hereinafter SCS), failed to demonstrate, prima facie, its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the third-party complaint insofar as asserted against it (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]). SCS failed to establish the absence of any triable issues of fact as to whether it controlled the work or had the authority to control, supervise, or direct the work which allegedly gave rise to the plaintiffs injuries. Schmidt, J.P., Ritter, Santucci and Lunn, 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 [391]*391injuries, the third-party defendant SCS Systems, Ltd., appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kitzes, J.), dated April 15, 2005, which denied its motion, in effect, for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The facts relevant to this appeal are set forth in Stafford v Viacom, Inc., 32 AD3d 388 [2006] [decided herewith]).

The third-party defendant SCS Systems, Ltd. (hereinafter SCS), failed to demonstrate, prima facie, its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the third-party complaint insofar as asserted against it (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]). SCS failed to establish the absence of any triable issues of fact as to whether it controlled the work or had the authority to control, supervise, or direct the work which allegedly gave rise to the plaintiffs injuries. Schmidt, J.P., Ritter, Santucci and Lunn, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 A.D.3d 390, 818 N.Y.S.2d 782, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stafford-v-viacom-inc-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack