Opinion
April 20, 1987
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Shaw, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
It is clear that the appellant's conviction for attempted manslaughter in the first degree arising out of the same events as those of the instant action establishes his civil liability for assault and battery under the doctrine of collateral estoppel (see, e.g., Merchants Mut. Ins. Co. v Arzillo, 98 A.D.2d 495). Thus, the court was correct in granting the plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment against that defendant.
Furthermore, the court's denial of the appellant's cross motion to dismiss the assault cause of action on the ground that the plaintiff failed to allege intentional conduct was correct. The plaintiff's allegation that the appellant "fired a gun at [her] and caused her to be shot" is sufficient to support the denial of that motion (see, Marx v Edison Elec. Illuminating Co., 201 App. Div. 607, 609-610; see also, Guggenheimer v Ginzburg, 43 N.Y.2d 268, 275; Siegel, Practice Commentaries, McKinney's Cons Laws of NY, Book 7B, CPLR C3013:13). Thompson, J.P., Brown, Niehoff and Rubin, JJ., concur.