From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stredwick v. New York City Dep't of Educ.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Dec 27, 2011
90 A.D.3d 1023 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)

Opinion

2011-12-27

Helaine STREDWICK, appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, et al., respondents,P.P.L. Construction Corp., defendant.

Jonathan C. Reiter, New York, N.Y. (Meryl I. Schwartz of counsel), for appellant. Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker LLP, New York, N.Y. (Debra A. Adler and Mathew P. Ross of counsel), for respondents.


Jonathan C. Reiter, New York, N.Y. (Meryl I. Schwartz of counsel), for appellant. Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker LLP, New York, N.Y. (Debra A. Adler and Mathew P. Ross of counsel), for respondents.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by her brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Kelly, J.), entered April 23, 2010, as granted those branches of the defendants' motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against the defendants New York City Department of Education, New York City Board of Education, City of New York, New York City School Construction Authority, P & K Contracting, Inc., K Z & V Construction, Inc., Rex Construction Corp., and Imperium Construction, Inc.

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

The respondents made a prima facie showing that they did not cause the plaintiff's alleged injuries. They demonstrated, through the affirmed report of their medical expert and the plaintiff's medical records, that the plaintiff's alleged exposure to silica did not cause her illness and symptoms ( see Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320, 508 N.Y.S.2d 923, 501 N.E.2d 572). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. She offered no expert evidence showing that her medical condition and symptoms were caused by her alleged exposure to silica ( see Parker v. Mobil Oil Corp., 7 N.Y.3d 434, 448, 824 N.Y.S.2d 584, 857 N.E.2d 1114). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly determined that the respondents were entitled to summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.

MASTRO, A.P.J., HALL, SGROI and COHEN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Stredwick v. New York City Dep't of Educ.

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.
Dec 27, 2011
90 A.D.3d 1023 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
Case details for

Stredwick v. New York City Dep't of Educ.

Case Details

Full title:Helaine STREDWICK, appellant, v. NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, et…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, New York.

Date published: Dec 27, 2011

Citations

90 A.D.3d 1023 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 9622
934 N.Y.S.2d 837