Legal Opinion
Arias v. State
New York Court of Claims
Decided January 27, 2003No. Claim No. 97942PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Stephen J. Mignano, J.
At the outset, the court is well aware that summary judg*65ment is a drastic remedy to be granted sparingly and only where no material issues of fact are demonstrated in the papers related to the motion (see, Crowley’s Milk Co. v Klein, 24 AD2d 920 [3d Dept 1965]; Wanger v Zeh, 45 Misc 2d 93, affd 26 AD2d 729 [3d Dept 1966]).
The proponent of a summary judgment motion must make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, tendering sufficient evidence to demonstrate the absence of any material issues of fact (Winegrad v New York…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Zuckerman v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- Alvarez v. Prospect HospitalNew York Court of Appeals · 1986
- Winegrad v. New York University Medical CenterNew York Court of Appeals · 1985
- Sillman v. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1957
- Gordon v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1987
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Andrews v. County of CayugaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Dodson v. South Dakota Department of Human ServicesSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2005
- Arias v. StateNew York Court of Claims · 2005
- ANDREWS, RICHARD T. v. COUNTY OF CAYUGAAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
- Andrews v. County of CayugaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012