Yadgarov v. Dekel

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Yadgarov v. Dekel

2 A.D.3d 631, 768 N.Y.S.2d 337

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided December 15, 2003·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hart, J.), dated March 31, 2003, which denied his motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

[632] Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff’s contention, his motion was premature since substantial discovery remains outstanding (see generally Ross v Curtis-Palmer Hydro-Elec. Co., 81 NY2d 494, 506 [1993]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the motion. Smith, J.P., McGinity, Luciano and Townes, 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 appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Hart, J.), dated March 31, 2003, which denied his motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.

[632] Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiff’s contention, his motion was premature since substantial discovery remains outstanding (see generally Ross v Curtis-Palmer Hydro-Elec. Co., 81 NY2d 494, 506 [1993]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the motion. Smith, J.P., McGinity, Luciano and Townes, JJ., concur.

Yadgarov v. Dekel, 2 A.D.3d 631, 768 N.Y.S.2d 337 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

2 A.D.3d 631 (Yadgarov v. Dekel) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related