Suchmacher v. Manana Grocery

73 A.D.3d 1017, 900 N.Y.S.2d 686
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 18, 2010
StatusPublished
Cited by30 cases

This text of 73 A.D.3d 1017 (Suchmacher v. Manana Grocery) 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
Suchmacher v. Manana Grocery, 73 A.D.3d 1017, 900 N.Y.S.2d 686 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant Carmen Webb appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (McMahon, J.), dated July 28, 2009, which denied her motion pursuant to CFLR 3211 (a) (1) to dismiss the amended complaint insofar as asserted against her.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

A CFLR 3211 (a) (1) motion to dismiss based on documentary evidence may be appropriately granted “only where the documentary evidence utterly refutes plaintiffs factual allegations, conclusively establishing a defense as a matter of law” (Goshen v Mutual Life Ins. Co. of N.Y., 98 NY2d 314, 326 [2002]; see Leon v Martinez, 84 NY2d 83, 88 [1994]; Fontanetta v John Doe 1, 73 AD3d 78 [2010]; Lucia v Goldman, 68 AD3d 1064 [2009]; Elm Sea Realty Corp. v Chicoy, 68 AD3d 1047 [2009]; Schwarz Supply Source v Redi Bag USA, LLC, 64 AD3d 696 [2009]). Although documents such as deeds, which reflect out-of-court transactions and are essentially unassailable, qualify as “documentary evidence” within the intended scope of CFLR 3211 (a) (1), affidavits and deposition testimony do not (see Fontanetta v John Doe 1, 73 AD3d 78 [2010]).

Here, even if a 1995 deed by which the appellant transferred, to her son, the title of the premises at which the subject accident allegedly occurred were sufficient to conclusively establish that the appellant did not own the premises on the date of the accident, the appellant failed to offer any qualifying documentary evidence to refute the plaintiffs’ allegation that [1018]*1018she “operated, managed and controlled” the premises. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the appellant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1) to dismiss the amended complaint insofar as asserted against her (see Fontanetta v John Doe 1, 73 AD3d 78 [2010]; Lucia v Goldman, 68 AD3d 1064 [2009]; Elm Sea Realty Corp. v Chicoy, 68 AD3d 1047 [2009]; Schwarz Supply Source v Redi Bag USA, LLC, 64 AD3d 696 [2009]). Dillon, J.P., Miller, Dickerson and Chambers, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Zain v. Ernest L. Isaacson DPM, P.C.
2025 NY Slip Op 30060(U) (New York Supreme Court, New York County, 2025)
Bondarevsky v. Shamis Chiropractic P.C.
2024 NY Slip Op 50916(U) (New York Supreme Court, Kings County, 2024)
Leader v. Steinway, Inc.
2020 NY Slip Op 1153 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Henn v. City of New York
2018 NY Slip Op 5830 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Sims v. Prom Realty Co., LLC
2018 NY Slip Op 2822 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Reiss v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co.
53 Misc. 3d 752 (New York Supreme Court, 2016)
YDRA, LLC v. Mitchell
123 A.D.3d 1113 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Attias v. Costiera
120 A.D.3d 1281 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
J.A. Lee Electric, Inc. v. City of New York
119 A.D.3d 652 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Kalikow v. Shalik
43 Misc. 3d 817 (New York Supreme Court, 2014)
Rodolico v. Rubin & Licatesi, P.C.
112 A.D.3d 608 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
North Shore Towers Apartments Inc. v. Three Towers Associates
104 A.D.3d 825 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Bank of America v. Keso Sagg, LLC
103 A.D.3d 604 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2013)
Rabos v. R&R Bagels & Bakery, Inc.
100 A.D.3d 849 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Norment v. Interfaith Center
98 A.D.3d 955 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Cives Corp. v. George A. Fuller Co.
97 A.D.3d 713 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Jones v. Rochdale Village, Inc.
96 A.D.3d 1014 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2012)
Torah v. Dell Equity, LLC
90 A.D.3d 746 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Forbes v. Aaron
81 A.D.3d 876 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Loevner v. Loevner
81 A.D.3d 791 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
73 A.D.3d 1017, 900 N.Y.S.2d 686, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/suchmacher-v-manana-grocery-nyappdiv-2010.