Davern v. City of New York
Decision Date | 29 October 2001 |
Citation | 732 N.Y.S.2d 180,287 A.D.2d 679 |
Parties | PEGGY A. DAVERN, Respondent,<BR>v.<BR>CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Respondents, and GRACE CONTRACTING CORPORATION, Appellant. |
Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Krausman, J. P., McGinity, H. Miller and Smith, JJ., concur.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.
On a motion for summary judgment, the movant must make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, tendering evidentiary proof in admissible form sufficient to eliminate any material issues of fact from the case (see, Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851; Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557; Friends of Animals v Associated Fur Mfrs., 46 NY2d 1065). Failure to make such a showing requires denial of the motion, regardless of the sufficiency of the opposing papers (see, Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., supra; Gstalder v State of New York, 240 AD2d 541).
The proof submitted by the defendant Grace Contracting Corporation failed to establish as a matter of law that it was not performing work at the accident site at or near the time of the accident.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Bos. Tremont Hous. Dev. Fund Corp. v. Dunbar
...to summary judgment upon making a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. ( Davern v. City of New York , 287 A.D.2d 679, 732 N.Y.S.2d 180 [2001] ). Once the movant has 62 Misc.3d 847established a prima facie case for entitlement to summary judgment, the burden shi......
- Cox v. FOSTER APARTMENT GROUP, LP