From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Anderson v. Rehabilitation Programs Found

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 16, 1997
240 A.D.2d 524 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

Opinion

June 16, 1997

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Beisner, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff has failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see, CPLR 3212 [b]) as to whether the defendants' alleged negligence proximately caused his injuries (see, McIntyre v. Beaver Dam Winter Sports Club, 163 A.D.2d 277).

Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the Supreme Court did not act prematurely in granting the motion even though discovery had not been completed. The mere hope that evidence sufficient to defeat a motion for summary judgment may be uncovered during the discovery process does not justify a delay on the part of the court in determining the motion (see, Mazzaferro v. Barterama Corp., 218 A.D.2d 643).

Rosenblatt, J.P., Copertino, Pizzuto, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Anderson v. Rehabilitation Programs Found

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 16, 1997
240 A.D.2d 524 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
Case details for

Anderson v. Rehabilitation Programs Found

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT N. ANDERSON, Appellant, v. REHABILITATION PROGRAMS FOUNDATION…

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

Date published: Jun 16, 1997

Citations

240 A.D.2d 524 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)
659 N.Y.S.2d 992

Citing Cases

Trav. Cas. Sur. Co. of Am. v. Bank of Am.

A party's "mere hope that evidence sufficient to defeat a motion for summary judgment may be uncovered"…

Simpson v. New York

In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact ( see Zuckerman v City of New York, 49…