Summary
affirming denial of plaintiffs' summary judgment motion where plaintiffs' evidence did not establish that they were free from comparative negligence
Summary of this case from Wright v. United StatesOpinion
No. 2007-06573.
March 25, 2008.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vaughan, J.), dated June 13, 2007, which denied their motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.
Thomas D. Wilson, P.C., Brooklyn, N.Y., for appellants.
Hawkins Feretic Daly, LLP, New York, N.Y. (James M. Merlino of counsel), for respondents.
Before: Rivera, J.P., Skelos, Santucci and Leventhal, JJ.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
Under the circumstances of this case, the evidence submitted by the plaintiffs did not establish, as a matter of law, that the injured plaintiff was free from comparative negligence ( see Thoma v Ronai, 82 NY2d 736, 737; Cator v Filipe, 47 AD3d 664; Albert v Klein, 15 AD3d 509, 510; Valore v McIntosh, 8 AD3d 662). Since the plaintiffs failed to meet their burden as the movants, we need not review the sufficiency of the defendants' opposition papers ( see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851; Valore v McIntosh, 8 AD3d 662).