From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pelaez v. Seide

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 11, 2008
49 A.D.3d 618 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

No. 2007-01225.

March 11, 2008.

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants Laura Seide and Gary Seide appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Putnam County (O'Rourke, J.), dated January 23, 2007, as denied that branch of their motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

Nancy Fairchild Sachs, P.C., New York, N.Y., for respondents.

Before: Mastro, J.P., Covello, Eng and Belen, JJ.


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied that branch of the appellants' motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them because they failed to tender evidence sufficient to entitle them to judgment as a matter of law ( see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324). Questions of fact exist as to whether the appellants owned or controlled the subject property during the time when the infant plaintiffs sustained their injuries ( see Ellers v Horwitz Family Ltd. Partnership, 36 AD3d 849).


Summaries of

Pelaez v. Seide

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 11, 2008
49 A.D.3d 618 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

Pelaez v. Seide

Case Details

Full title:MARIA NANCY PELAEZ et al., Respondents, v. LAURA SEIDE et al., Appellants…

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

Date published: Mar 11, 2008

Citations

49 A.D.3d 618 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 2125
852 N.Y.S.2d 800

Citing Cases

Pelaez v. Seide

In the end, the trial before this Court and the determinations herein made are limited to the liability of…