Legal Opinion
Kolivas v. Kirchoff
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided January 10, 2005PublishedCited by 39 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants Maureen D. Kirchoff and Francis A. Kirchoff appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Satterfield, J.), dated July 7, 2003, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against them.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.
Summary judgment is a drastic remedy that deprives a litigant of his or her day in court, and it “should only be employed when there is no doubt as to the absence of triable issues” (Andre v Pomeroy, 35…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Andre v. PomeroyNew York Court of Appeals · 1974
- Rebecchi v. WhitmoreAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- Scott v. Long Island Power AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Omrami v. SocratesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
- Anyanwu v. JohnsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
3Cited by39 opinions
- Stukas v. StreiterAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Yelder v. WaltersAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- Pollack v. MargolinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Pearson v. Dix McBride, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- Allen v. EcholsAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.