Zguris v. K-Mart Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Zguris v. K-Mart Corp.

285 A.D.2d 591, 728 N.Y.S.2d 188, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7604

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

DecidedJuly 23, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 285 A.D.2d 591 (Zguris v. K-Mart Corp.) 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

Zguris v. K-Mart Corp., 285 A.D.2d 591, 728 N.Y.S.2d 188, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7604 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated February 29, 2000, as granted the motion of the defendant Kmart Corporation s/h/a K-Mart Corp. for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

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

K-Mart met its initial burden of establishing its entitlement to summary judgment as a matter of law. In opposition, the appellants failed to raise a triable issue of fact to defeat summary judgment (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562). Therefore, the Supreme Court properly granted K-Mart’s motion for summary judgment. Santucci, J. P., Gold-stein, Feuerstein and Crane, 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, etc., the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated February 29, 2000, as granted the motion of the defendant Kmart Corporation s/h/a K-Mart Corp. for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

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

K-Mart met its initial burden of establishing its entitlement to summary judgment as a matter of law. In opposition, the appellants failed to raise a triable issue of fact to defeat summary judgment (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562). Therefore, the Supreme Court properly granted K-Mart’s motion for summary judgment. Santucci, J. P., Gold-stein, Feuerstein and Crane, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

285 A.D.2d 591, 728 N.Y.S.2d 188, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7604, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zguris-v-k-mart-corp-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack