Walsh v. Altam

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Walsh v. Altam

303 A.D.2d 495, 756 N.Y.S.2d 452

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

DecidedMarch 10, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 303 A.D.2d 495 (Walsh v. Altam) 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

Walsh v. Altam, 303 A.D.2d 495, 756 N.Y.S.2d 452 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff Louise Mullen appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schmidt, J.), dated February 19, 2002, as granted that branch of the motion of the defendant Angel Marocchi which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted by her against him.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

In opposition to the defendant Angel Marrochi’s demonstration of his prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted by the plaintiff Louise Mullen against him, Mullen failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see CPLR 3212 [b]; Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557 [1980]). Thus, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted by Mullen against Marocchi. Ritter, J.P., Feuerstein, McGinity and Luciano, 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 plaintiff Louise Mullen appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Schmidt, J.), dated February 19, 2002, as granted that branch of the motion of the defendant Angel Marocchi which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted by her against him.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

In opposition to the defendant Angel Marrochi’s demonstration of his prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted by the plaintiff Louise Mullen against him, Mullen failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see CPLR 3212 [b]; Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557 [1980]). Thus, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted by Mullen against Marocchi. Ritter, J.P., Feuerstein, McGinity and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

303 A.D.2d 495, 756 N.Y.S.2d 452, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walsh-v-altam-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack