Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Cabrera v. New York University College of Dentistry

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Decided September 11, 2009Published

1Concurrence

McKeon, PJ. (concurring in part and dissenting in part).

I agree with the majority that Civil Court properly exercised its discretion in granting renewal and permitting plaintiff to cure deficiencies in the expert affirmation submitted in opposition to defendant’s motion for summary judgment (see Mattis v Keen, Zhao, 54 AD3d 610 [2008]). I disagree, however, with the majority’s conclusion that the affirmation of plaintiffs expert was sufficient to raise issues of fact warranting a trial.

While plaintiff’s expert opined that defendant’s employees departed from good and accepted dental practice…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Koeppel v. ParkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996
  2. Mattis v. KeenAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008

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

Powered by the Exa API