From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hilltop Village Coop. #3 Inc. v. Greenblatt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 9, 1990
163 A.D.2d 355 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

July 9, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Joy, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The proponent of a summary judgment motion must set forth prima facie evidence sufficient to eliminate any material issues of fact from the case. Failure to make such a showing requires denial of the motion, regardless of the sufficiency of the opposing papers (Winegrad v. New York Univ. Med. Center, 64 N.Y.2d 851, 853; see also, Narciso v. Ford Motor Co., 137 A.D.2d 508).

We agree with the Supreme Court that the plaintiff corporation is not entitled to summary judgment, as its motion papers did not establish prima facie that the defendant improperly sublet her apartment. Thompson, J.P., Rubin, Rosenblatt and Miller, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Hilltop Village Coop. #3 Inc. v. Greenblatt

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 9, 1990
163 A.D.2d 355 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Hilltop Village Coop. #3 Inc. v. Greenblatt

Case Details

Full title:HILLTOP VILLAGE COOPERATIVE #3 INC., Appellant, v. ANNE GREENBLATT…

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

Date published: Jul 9, 1990

Citations

163 A.D.2d 355 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
559 N.Y.S.2d 654

Citing Cases

Eagle Ins. Co. v. Barraeau

As plaintiff has failed to meet its burden of demonstrating that it is entitled to summary judgment as a…