From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hayes v. Dutchess County

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 24, 1996
228 A.D.2d 648 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

June 24, 1996

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


Ordered that the amended judgment is affirmed, with costs.

It is well settled that after a party, as here, has made out a prima facie case for summary judgment, a party opposing such a motion must produce evidentiary proof in admissible form sufficient to require a trial of material questions of fact on which the opposing party bases his or her claim. Mere conclusions, expressions of hope, or unsubstantiated allegations or assertions are insufficient to meet this burden ( see, Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 560). The plaintiff has failed to meet his burden; accordingly the Supreme Court properly granted the respondents' motion for summary judgment. Pizzuto, J.P., Santucci, Altman and Hart, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Hayes v. Dutchess County

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 24, 1996
228 A.D.2d 648 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Hayes v. Dutchess County

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL HAYES, Appellant, v. DUTCHESS COUNTY et al., Respondents, et al.…

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

Date published: Jun 24, 1996

Citations

228 A.D.2d 648 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
644 N.Y.S.2d 984