Gruska v. City of New York
Cases that cite this one
7 later published cases cite this decision.
- Smith v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2022)
- Allen v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
- Perez v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- Perez v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
- Regan v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2004)
- Brill v. City of New York (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
- Rutto v. County of Westchester (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2002)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.), dated May 4, 2001, which granted the defendants’ respective motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them, and denied their cross motion to compel disclosure.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
In support of its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it, the defendant City of New York established, prima facie, its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting a copy of the most recent “Big Apple” map filed with the Department of Transportation approximately nine months before the accident. That map,
In opposition, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact, offering only hope and speculation as to what additional discovery would uncover. Therefore, the Supreme Court correctly granted the defendants’ respective motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them and denied the plaintiffs’ cross motion to compel disclosure (see, Mazzaferro v Barterama Corp., 218 AD2d 643, 644). Santucci, J.P., Goldstein, Luciano, Schmidt and Crane, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.