From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tamburello v. Rubino

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Oct 21, 2020
187 A.D.3d 1092 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)

Opinion

2017–10169 Index No. 3934/14

10-21-2020

Angela TAMBURELLO, Appellant, v. Rosina RUBINO, et al., Respondents.

Frekhtman & Associates, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Eileen Kaplan of counsel), for appellant. Jacobson & Schwartz, LLP, Jericho, N.Y. (Henry J. Cernitz of counsel), for respondents.


Frekhtman & Associates, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Eileen Kaplan of counsel), for appellant.

Jacobson & Schwartz, LLP, Jericho, N.Y. (Henry J. Cernitz of counsel), for respondents.

LEONARD B. AUSTIN, J.P., JEFFREY A. COHEN, ANGELA G. IANNACCI, LINDA CHRISTOPHER, JJ.

DECISION & ORDER

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rudolph E. Greco, Jr., J.), entered August 29, 2017. The order, insofar as appealed from, in effect, granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, and the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is denied as premature.

The plaintiff allegedly was injured when she slipped on a staircase in a house owned by the defendants. She commenced this action and subsequently initiated discovery. Before the plaintiff had the opportunity to finish depositions, the defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. The Supreme Court, in effect, granted the motion, and the plaintiff appeals.

The defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint only days after the defendant Jennifer Rubino–Mount left her deposition before it was completed and the defendants' attorney refused to allow the plaintiff to depose the defendant Josephine Rubino Nolan, who was also present at that deposition. Contrary to the defendants' contentions, the plaintiff's attorney was not at fault for the failure to complete the depositions of these two witnesses, and we cannot conclude that the discovery afforded to the plaintiff was sufficient without these depositions. Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have denied the defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as premature (see CPLR 3212[f] ).

AUSTIN, J.P., COHEN, IANNACCI and CHRISTOPHER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Tamburello v. Rubino

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department
Oct 21, 2020
187 A.D.3d 1092 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)
Case details for

Tamburello v. Rubino

Case Details

Full title:Angela Tamburello, appellant, v. Rosina Rubino, et al., respondents.

Court:SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department

Date published: Oct 21, 2020

Citations

187 A.D.3d 1092 (N.Y. App. Div. 2020)
187 A.D.3d 1092
2020 N.Y. Slip Op. 5967

Citing Cases

Westgate v. Jie Yuan Huang

Accordingly, both motions are hereby denied as premature as there is outstanding discovery which would likely…

Cruz v. Fanoush

Here, at the time the plaintiff moved for summary judgment on the issues of liability and whether he…