From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hibbert v. Avwontom

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 26, 2006
35 A.D.3d 813 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

No. 2006-04984.

December 26, 2006.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Johnson, J.), dated April 27, 2006, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint based on the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel.

Picciano Scahill, P.C., Westbury, N.Y. (Gilbert J. Hardy of counsel), for appellants.

Donald Friedman, P.C., Brooklyn, N.Y. (Mitchell Gorkin of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Miller, J.P., Crane, Lifson and Dillon, JJ.


Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted.

The defendants made a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law demonstrating that the instant litigation is barred by the doctrine of collateral estoppel based on a previous arbitration award which was adverse to the plaintiff ( see Clemens v Apple, 65 NY2d 746, 748-749; Ryan v New York Tel. Co., 62 NY2d 494, 500, 500-501; Goepel v City of New York, 23 AD3d 344, 346; Carter v Gospel Temple Church of God in Christ, 19 AD3d 353, 354-355). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact ( see Martin v Geico Direct Ins., 31 AD3d 505, 506). Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

The plaintiff's remaining contention is without merit ( see Matter of New York Cent. Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v Reinhardt, 27 AD3d 751, 753; Hilowitz v Hilowitz, 85 AD2d 621).


Summaries of

Hibbert v. Avwontom

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Dec 26, 2006
35 A.D.3d 813 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

Hibbert v. Avwontom

Case Details

Full title:PRESTON HIBBERT, Respondent, v. VICTOR AVWONTOM et al., Appellants

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Dec 26, 2006

Citations

35 A.D.3d 813 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 10025
826 N.Y.S.2d 441

Citing Cases

Perez v. State of New York

Under these circumstances, and for the reasons stated above, the doctrine of collateral estoppel applies. The…

Perez v. State

The invocation of collateral estoppel, in turn, provides ample basis for defendant to meet its prima facie…