From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Amona v. Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 11, 2005
17 A.D.3d 386 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

Opinion

2004-00338.

April 11, 2005.

In an action to recover for property damage, the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Weiner, J.), dated December 5, 2003, which, inter alia, granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Barry D. Haberman, New City, N.Y., for appellants.

MacCartney, MacCartney, Kerrigan MacCartney, Nyack, N.Y. (John D. MacCartney of counsel), for respondent.

Before: H. Miller, J.P., Cozier, Rivera and Skelos, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs commenced this action to recover for property damage which resulted from a boiler explosion at the subject premises. Contrary to the plaintiffs' contention, the defendant demonstrated its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting evidentiary proof which established that it was not responsible for the explosion ( see Friends of Animals v. Associated Fur Mfrs., 46 NY2d 1065).

In opposition, the affidavit of the plaintiffs' expert was speculative and conclusory, and was insufficient to raise a triable of fact ( see Romano v. Stanley, 90 NY2d 444). Therefore, the grant of summary judgment was proper.

The plaintiffs' remaining contention is without merit.


Summaries of

Amona v. Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 11, 2005
17 A.D.3d 386 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
Case details for

Amona v. Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:MARSEL AMONA et al., Appellants, v. ORANGE AND ROCKLAND UTILITIES, INC.…

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

Date published: Apr 11, 2005

Citations

17 A.D.3d 386 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
792 N.Y.S.2d 360