From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Martinez v. State

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Jan 9, 2019
168 A.D.3d 710 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)

Opinion

2017–02204 Claim No. 124138

01-09-2019

George MARTINEZ, etc., Appellant, v. STATE of New York, et al., Respondents.

Schwartzapfel Lawyers, P.C. (Alexander J. Wulwick of counsel), for appellant. Cartafalsa, Slattery, Turpin & Lenoff, New York, N.Y. (Michael J. Lenoff of counsel), for respondents.


Schwartzapfel Lawyers, P.C. (Alexander J. Wulwick of counsel), for appellant.

Cartafalsa, Slattery, Turpin & Lenoff, New York, N.Y. (Michael J. Lenoff of counsel), for respondents.

MARK C. DILLON, J.P., RUTH C. BALKIN, ROBERT J. MILLER, ANGELA G. IANNACCI, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

In a claim to recover damages for wrongful death and conscious pain and suffering, the claimant appeals from an order of the Court of Claims (David A. Weinstein, J.), dated October 18, 2016. The order granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the claim.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The background facts as to this claim and a related action commenced by the claimant herein in the Supreme Court, Queens County, are set forth in this Court's decision and order on a companion appeal (see Martinez v. City of New York, ––– A.D.3d ––––, ––– N.Y.S.3d ––––, 2019 WL 138516 ; decided herewith). In the companion appeal, this Court is affirming, insofar as appealed from, an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Janice A. Taylor, J.), entered May 18, 2016, that awarded summary judgment to the defendant E.C.C.O. III Enterprises, Inc., on the ground that the plaintiff was unable to identify the cause of the decedent's accident.

In an order dated October 18, 2016, the Court of Claims, in light of the order of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered May 18, 2016, granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the claim on the basis of the doctrine of collateral estoppel. The claimant appeals.

On appeal, the claimant raises the same arguments as those he raised in the companion appeal, which this Court is holding to be without merit (see Martinez v. City of New York, ––– A.D.3d ––––, ––– N.Y.S.3d ––––, 2019 WL 138516 ; decided herewith). Accordingly, we affirm.In light of our determination, we need not reach the claimant's remaining contentions.

DILLON, J.P., BALKIN, MILLER and IANNACCI, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Martinez v. State

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Jan 9, 2019
168 A.D.3d 710 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
Case details for

Martinez v. State

Case Details

Full title:George Martinez, etc., appellant, v. State of New York, et al.…

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

Date published: Jan 9, 2019

Citations

168 A.D.3d 710 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
168 A.D.3d 710
2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 108

Citing Cases

Martinez v. City of N.Y.

The decedent's brother, as the administrator of the decedent's estate, commenced this action against, among…