TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Lurie v. Child's Hospital

Muriel Lurie v. Child's Hospital

Lurie v. Child's Hosp., 70 A.D.2d 1032 (1979)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · State Appellate Courts
Decided
June 21, 1979
Citations
70 A.D.2d 1032418 N.Y.S.2d 1761979 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12665

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

— Appeal from an order of Supreme Court at Special Term, entered May 24, 1978 in Albany County, which denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212. The defendant moved for an order of summary judgment seeking a dismissal of the complaint alleging negligence on the part of the defendant in the design, construction, maintenance, control and ownership of a driveway leading into a complex where the Child’s Hospital adjoins and abuts the Child’s Nursing Home facility. The affidavit submitted by George Mayers, Jr., executive vice-president of the defendant corporation, alleges that the Child’s Hospital did not own the driveway entrance on the day of the accident and did not design or create the entrance. Annexed to the affidavit is a deed which purports to indicate that transfer of the premises, including the driveway, was made to the Child’s Nursing Home, a separate corporate entity, before the accident date. Plaintiffs opposing affidavit, made by her attorney, alleges that defendant has retained easements and conveyed only a part of the property it owned when it deeded land to the Child’s Nursing Home and that the proof submitted does not unequivocally prove that the driveway is not owned by the defendant. We agree with the conclusion arrived at by Special Term that factual issues are presented which must be resolved by trial. While it is true, as defendant urges, that plaintiffs counsel’s affidavit is conclusory and raises no questions of fact or presents any evidentiary material, nevertheless, the moving affidavits and proof do not establish defendant’s right to recover in the action, as a matter of law. It is impossible to resolve the question of the legal ownership of the driveway and responsibility for its design, construction, maintenance and control from the documents presented. The burden is upon the movant to produce such evidence even where the opposing papers may be insufficient to defeat the motion (Walski v Forma, 54 AD2d 776 ; Stelick v Gangl, 47 AD2d 789 ). Order affirmed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Greenblott, Sweeney, Main and Mikoll, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.

  • (possibility of retention by defendant of easement interest over driveway, in negligence action, created material question of fact with respect to ownership and responsibility for design, construction, maintenance, and control)
1983: 11984: 11985: 21987: 11996: 119832026peak 1985 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Pamela Sutera, and James Sutera v. Go Jokir, Inc.86 F.3d 298 (2d Cir. 1996)
  2. Cugini v. System Lumber Co.111 A.D.2d 114 (1985)
  3. Sun Yau Ko v. Lincoln Savings Bank99 A.D.2d 943 (1984)
  4. Gaeta v. New York News, Inc.95 A.D.2d 315 (1983)
  5. Alvarez v. Prospect Hospital115 A.D.2d 444 (1985) · Concurrence
  6. Walsh v. Dormitory AuthoriIty134 A.D.2d 342 (1987)

Most recent

  1. Pamela Sutera, and James Sutera v. Go Jokir, Inc.86 F.3d 298 (2d Cir. 1996)
  2. Walsh v. Dormitory AuthoriIty134 A.D.2d 342 (1987)
  3. Alvarez v. Prospect Hospital115 A.D.2d 444 (1985) · Concurrence
  4. Cugini v. System Lumber Co.111 A.D.2d 114 (1985)
  5. Sun Yau Ko v. Lincoln Savings Bank99 A.D.2d 943 (1984)
  6. Gaeta v. New York News, Inc.95 A.D.2d 315 (1983)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
Walski v. Forma, 54 A.D.2d 776 (1976) 16
Stelick v. Gangl, 47 A.D.2d 789 (1975) 12

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list