Daleo v. James, 859 N.Y.S.2d 375

Daleo v. James

859 N.Y.S.2d 375

N.Y. App. Div.

2008

Check Treatment

Franklyn G. Daleo, Appellant, v Ian R. James et al., Respondents

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second Department

859 N.Y.S.2d 375

Supreme Court, Suffolk County (R. Doyle, J.)

FRANKLYN G. DALEO, Appellant, v IAN R. JAMES et al., Respondents. [859 NYS2d 375]—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (R. Doyle, J.), dated May 21, 2007, which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court correctly determined that the evidence submitted in support of the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint was sufficient to establish their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Vitale v Levine, 44 AD3d 935 [2007]; Sirico v Beukelaer, 14 AD3d 549 [2005]; Baker v Staria, 6 AD3d 639 [2004]). In opposition, the plaintiff’s speculative and conclusory assertions failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 326-327 [1986]; Vitale v Levine, 44 AD3d at 936; Sirico v Beukelaer, 14 AD3d at 549; Baker v Staria, 6 AD3d at 639; Salazar v Ospina, 253 AD2d 550, 551 [1998]; Williams v Econ, 221 AD2d 429, 430 [1995]). The Supreme Court thus properly granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Rivera, J.P., Spolzino, Dickerson and Eng, JJ., concur.