midpage

Schwartz v. Nevatel Communications Corp.Schwartz v. Nevatel Communications Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Jun 14, 2004
Versions:8 A.D.3d 469
778 N.Y.S.2d 308
2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8457

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Dunn, J.), dated July 7, 2003, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant met its burden of establishing entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting evidence that it did not own or control the dog that bit the infant plaintiff (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320 [1986]). In opposition, the plaintiffs’ submission of inadmissible hearsay was insufficient to raise a triable issue of fact (see Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557 [1980]).

Accordingly, the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint was properly granted. Ritter, J.P., Altman, Mastro and Skelos, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Schwartz v. Nevatel Communications Corp.
Court Name: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Date Published: Jun 14, 2004
Citations: 8 A.D.3d 469; 778 N.Y.S.2d 308; 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8457
Court Abbreviation: N.Y. App. Div.
Log In