Legal Opinion
Dix v. Pines Hotel, Inc.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 30, 1992PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs and motion denied. Memorandum: The court erred by granting plaintiffs motion for summary judgment. On a motion for summary judgment, the proponent of the motion must set forth evidentiary proof, in admissible form, eliminating any material issue of fact from the suit (Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557; Merkley v Palmyra-Macedon Cent. School Dist., 130 AD2d 937). The evidence should be viewed in the light most favorable to the party opposing the motion (Robinson v Strong Mem. Hosp., 98 AD2d 976). Plaintiff failed to submit any proof in…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Zuckerman v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- Merkley v. Palmyra-Macedon Central School DistrictAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1987
- Anders v. SegallAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1986
3Cited by6 opinions
- Luthart v. DaneshAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- Baliva v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- Damerau v. JohnsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
- Stevens v. WatersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- Matter of DePonceauSurrogate's Court, Monroe County · 2026
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.