Singh v. Wesco Ins. Co.

1 Citing case

  1. Fusco v. The Archdiocese of N.Y.

    2023 N.Y. Slip Op. 50108 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 2023)

    Indeed, one of the cases cited in support of the motion (which perhaps inaccurately states a standard of law as if "evidentiary proof" is required), held that the Court could not "conclusively determine whether plaintiff has a cause of action" and indicated that disclosure was needed (see Nab-Tern Constructors v City of New York, 123 A.D.2d 571, 572-73 [1st Dept 1986]; see also Singh v Wesco Ins. Co., 201 A.D.3d 450, 450 [1st Dept 2022] ["because discovery has not been completed, it cannot be said at this stage of the litigation that the allegations are 'patently insufficient' on their face"]). Under this standard, the Court should examine but should not decide the merits unless it is palpably devoid of merit on its face as a matter of law (see Ancrum v St. Barnabas Hosp., 301 A.D.2d 474, 475 [1st Dept 2003]).