General
Francis J. LaManna, Respondent, v. Sudbury, Inc., et al., Appellants
244 A.D.2d 994668 N.Y.S.2d 968·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1997·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Francis J. LaManna, Respondent, v Sudbury, Inc., et al., Appellants.
[668 NYS2d 968]
[MAJORITY]
—Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment. “[T]he 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” (Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324). Defendants failed to make the required showing (see, Gardner v Honda Motor Co., 214 AD2d 1024). Because defendants did not meet their initial burden in moving for summary judgment, it is not necessary to consider the adequacy of plaintiffs opposing papers (see, Ayotte v Gervasio, 81 NY2d 1062, 1063). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Hayes, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Pine, Callahan and Boehm, JJ.