Legal Opinion
Sale v. Lee
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided March 25, 2008PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Under the circumstances of this case, the evidence submitted by the plaintiffs did not establish, as a matter of law, that the injured plaintiff was free from comparative negligence (see Thoma v Ronai, 82 NY2d 736, 737 [1993]; Cator v Filipe, 47 AD3d 664 [2008]; Albert v Klein, 15 AD3d 509, 510 [2005]; Valore *855v McIntosh, 8 AD3d 662 [2004]). Since the plaintiffs failed to meet their burden as the movants, we need not review the sufficiency of the defendants’ opposition papers (see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851 [1985]; Valore v McIntosh, 8 AD3d 662 [2004]). Rivera, J.P.,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Winegrad v. New York University Medical CenterNew York Court of Appeals · 1985
- Thoma v. RonaiNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
- Cator v. FilipeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- Valore v. McIntoshAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- Albert v. KleinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
3Cited by7 opinions
- Mackenzie v. City of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Lum v. WallaceAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
- Strychalski v. DaileyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- Cali v. MustafaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- Haberman v. BurkeAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2014
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.