From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nesper v. Goldmag Hacking Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 28, 2010
77 A.D.3d 598 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)

Opinion

No. 3512.

October 28, 2010.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Paul Wooten, J.), entered December 9, 2009, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied.

Baker, McEvoy, Morrissey Moskovits, P.C., New York (Stacy R. Seldin of counsel), for appellants.

Marie R. Hodukavich, Peekskill, for respondent.

Before: Saxe, J.P., Acosta, Freedman, Richter and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.


Although plaintiff made a prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment on the issue of liability by supplying an affidavit stating that she was struck by defendant's vehicle while crossing a street in a crosswalk with the green light, defendant met his burden of establishing the existence of material issues of fact requiring a trial by stating in his affidavit that his vehicle never struck plaintiff ( see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324). Defendant's affidavit did not contradict his statement to the police so as to warrant rejecting it as a belated attempt to avoid the consequences of an earlier admission. Accordingly, there was no basis for the grant of partial summary judgment to plaintiff.


Summaries of

Nesper v. Goldmag Hacking Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 28, 2010
77 A.D.3d 598 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
Case details for

Nesper v. Goldmag Hacking Corp.

Case Details

Full title:CATRINA NESPER, Respondent, v. GOLDMAG HACKING CORP. et al., Appellants

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

Date published: Oct 28, 2010

Citations

77 A.D.3d 598 (N.Y. App. Div. 2010)
2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 7693
911 N.Y.S.2d 287

Citing Cases

Ramcharran v. New York Airport Services, LLC

It is not intended to cover ultimate conclusions, which can only be made after a full and complete trial” (…

Jurjevic v. Singh

When he stopped, plaintiff's head and umbrella were by the left front tire of his car and his vehicle had…