Legal Opinion

Kaluga v. Korytowsky

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

Decided February 28, 2000PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jones, J.), dated July 19, 1999, as denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

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

On a motion for summary judgment, the movant initially bears the burden of setting forth evidentiary facts sufficient to entitle that party to judgment as a matter of law. Only then does the burden shift to the opposing party to come forward with proof…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Amatulli v. Delhi Construction Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1991
  2. Fabbricatore v. Lindenhurst Union Free School DistrictAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Maldonado v. Su Jong LeeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
  2. Oxford Health Plans (NY), Inc. v. Biomed Pharms., Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020
  3. Wonderly v. City of PoughkeepsieAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2020
  4. 222 Bloomingdale Road Associates v. NYNEX Properties Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API