Mazzone v. Lazaroff
Opinion of the Court
—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for wrongful death, the defendant third-party plaintiff, Michael Lazaroff,
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with one bill of costs payable to the appellant-respondent and respondents-appellants by the plaintiff, the motion and cross motions are granted, and the complaint, the third-party complaint, and all cross claims are dismissed.
In support of their separate motion and cross motions for summary judgment, the appellant-respondent and respondents-appellants (hereinafter the appellants) made prima facie showings of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320 [1986]). In opposition to the motion and cross motions, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. In particular, the plaintiff offered nothing more than speculation that any alleged negligence on the part of the appellants was a proximate cause of the decedent’s death (see Johnson v Sniffen, 265 AD2d 304 [1999]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have granted the appellants’ respective motion and cross motions for summary judgment. Ritter, J.P., Smith, Goldstein and H. Miller, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.