Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

69 A.D.3d 887

Amico v. Vallarelli

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · decided 2010-01-26

Decided 2010-01-26

¶1The defendant established his entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting, inter alia, his expert’s report concluding that the defendant was not negligent. In response, however, the plaintiff raised triable issues of fact. Accordingly, *888the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint was properly denied (see Tapia v Royal Tours Serv., Inc., 67 AD3d 894 [2009]; Lopez v Reyes-Flores, 52 AD3d 785 [2008] ; Gomez v Hilfiger, 45 AD3d 728, 729 [2007]; see generally Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]; cf. Bolta v Lohan, 242 AD2d 356 [1997]).

¶2The defendant’s remaining contention is without merit. Santucci, J.E, Dickerson, Eng and Chambers, JJ., concur.

/69/ad3d/887 · .json · Public domain