From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wilk v. Guthrie

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Oct 23, 2013
110 A.D.3d 988 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)

Opinion

2013-10-23

Alan B. WILK, et al., respondents, v. Elaine GUTHRIE, appellant.

Hodges Walsh & Slater, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. (Stephen H. Slater and Paul Svensson of counsel), for appellant. Favata & Wallace, LLP, Garden City, N.Y. (William G. Wallace of counsel), for respondents.


Hodges Walsh & Slater, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. (Stephen H. Slater and Paul Svensson of counsel), for appellant. Favata & Wallace, LLP, Garden City, N.Y. (William G. Wallace of counsel), for respondents.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Pineda–Kirwan, J.), entered July 3, 2012, which denied her motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The Supreme Court properly denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The conflicting deposition testimony submitted in support of the motion revealed the existence of triable issues of fact as to the manner in which the accident occurred, and whether the defendant created the condition which caused the accident ( see Willis v. Galileo Cortlandt, LLC, 106 A.D.3d 730, 964 N.Y.S.2d 576;*572Gagliardo v. Orton, 95 A.D.3d 1275, 944 N.Y.S.2d 920;Silverman v. Johnson, 94 A.D.3d 860, 861, 941 N.Y.S.2d 528;Molloy v. Waldbaum, Inc., 72 A.D.3d 659, 660, 897 N.Y.S.2d 653). Since the defendant thus failed to establish her prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, we need not examine the sufficiency of the plaintiff's opposition papers ( see Winegrad v. New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 N.Y.2d 851, 853, 487 N.Y.S.2d 316, 476 N.E.2d 642;Veltri v. Solomon, 107 A.D.3d 699, 700, 966 N.Y.S.2d 490).

ENG, P.J., BALKIN, LOTT and ROMAN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Wilk v. Guthrie

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Oct 23, 2013
110 A.D.3d 988 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
Case details for

Wilk v. Guthrie

Case Details

Full title:Alan B. WILK, et al., respondents, v. Elaine GUTHRIE, appellant.

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Oct 23, 2013

Citations

110 A.D.3d 988 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)
2013 N.Y. Slip Op. 6855
973 N.Y.S.2d 571

Citing Cases

Giannattasio v. Liatos

Furthermore, Dr. Adin affirmed that the November 8, 2013 objective range of motion testing revealed…