From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lafrancesca v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 7, 2005
23 A.D.3d 351 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

Opinion

2004-09755.

November 7, 2005.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Costello, J.), dated September 22, 2004, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Brody, O'Connor O'Connor, Northport, N.Y. (Thomas M. O'Connor and Patricia A. O'Connor of counsel), for appellant.

Siben Siben, LLP, Bay Shore, N.Y. (Alan G. Faber of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Schmidt, J.P., Crane, Krausman and Covello, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant failed to establish its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that it did not create the hazard that caused the injured plaintiff's accident ( see Knee v. Trump Vil. Constr. Corp., 15 AD3d 545; Karalic v. City of New York, 307 AD2d 254, 255). Since the defendant failed to meet its burden, it is not necessary to consider whether the papers submitted in opposition to the motion were sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact ( see Karalic v. City of New York, supra).


Summaries of

Lafrancesca v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 7, 2005
23 A.D.3d 351 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
Case details for

Lafrancesca v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:JOHN LAFRANCESCA et al., Respondents, v. WAL-MART STORES, INC., Appellant

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

Date published: Nov 7, 2005

Citations

23 A.D.3d 351 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 8287
803 N.Y.S.2d 438

Citing Cases

Totten v. Cumberland Farms

No evidence was elicited as to when the parking lot was last inspected and no information was provided as to…

Parker v. 2001 Marcus Ave.

Thus, summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them should have been denied…