From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rosario v. Humphreys Harding

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 14, 2003
301 A.D.2d 406 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2773

January 14, 2003.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Paul Victor, J.), entered May 23, 2002, which denied defendants-appellants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all counterclaims and cross claims as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Carol R. Finocchio, for Defendant.

Nardelli, J.P., Tom, Mazzarelli, Andrias, Saxe, JJ.


While summary judgment may be granted where a preclusion order relates to all aspects of the plaintiff's proof, thereby effectively preventing the plaintiff from making a case (Tirone v. Staten Is. Univ. Hosp., 264 A.D.2d 415), here plaintiff was precluded only from testifying at trial. Inasmuch as plaintiff seeks to recover not only for negligence but also for violation of absolute liability provisions of the Labor Law, it cannot be said that plaintiff necessarily will not be able to prove his case without testifying and that defendants are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Since defendants failed to make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the sufficiency of plaintiff's opposition is immaterial (Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320, 324).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Rosario v. Humphreys Harding

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 14, 2003
301 A.D.2d 406 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Rosario v. Humphreys Harding

Case Details

Full title:JOSE ROSARIO, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. HUMPHREYS HARDING, INC., ET AL.…

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

Date published: Jan 14, 2003

Citations

301 A.D.2d 406 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
752 N.Y.S.2d 865

Citing Cases

Wasserman v. Carella

We disagree to the extent that we find defendant failed to sustain his initial burden and, accordingly,…

Mendoza v. Highpoint Associates, IX, LLC

Contrary to Supreme Court's determination, the fact that defendant was precluded from presenting evidence at…