From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sheryll v. L J Hairstylists of Plainview

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 30, 2000
272 A.D.2d 603 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

May 30, 2000

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Davis, J.), dated August 2, 1999, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Before: Ritter, J.P., Santucci, S. Miller and Goldstein, JJ.


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the defendant's contentions, the Supreme Court properly denied its motion for summary judgment. Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the plaintiff as the party opposing summary judgment ( see, Rockowitz v. City of New York, 255 A.D.2d 434; Rosen Furs v. Sigma Plumbing Heating Corp., 249 A.D.2d 276), and giving her the benefit of every favorable inference ( see, Sofair v. Levin-Epstein, 231 A.D.2d 706), the plaintiff established the existence of issues of fact concerning the manner in which the accident occurred, and whether an employee of the defendant negligently contributed thereto.


Summaries of

Sheryll v. L J Hairstylists of Plainview

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 30, 2000
272 A.D.2d 603 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Sheryll v. L J Hairstylists of Plainview

Case Details

Full title:SELMA SHERYLL, RESPONDENT, v. L J HAIRSTYLISTS OF PLAINVIEW, LTD., DOING…

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

Date published: May 30, 2000

Citations

272 A.D.2d 603 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
709 N.Y.S.2d 429

Citing Cases

S.S. v. Port Wash. Union Free Sch. Dist.

In the context of a summary judgment motion, a court is to view the evidence in a light most favorable to the…

S.A. v. The Jewish Bd. of Family & Children's Servs.

In the context of a summary judgment motion, a court is to view the evidence in a light most favorable to the…