Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • Pegalis Erikson, LLC, Lake Success, N.Y. (Robert V. Fallarino and Linda M. Oliva of counsel), for appellant. Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman Dicker, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. (Garrett P. Lewis and John P. O'Sullivan of counsel), for respondent St. Luke's Roosevelt Hospital Center. Bower Lawrence, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Sari Havia of counsel), for respondent Dan Lazarescu, and McMahon Martine Gallagher, Brooklyn, N.Y., for respondent New York Medical Group, P.C. (one brief filed).
Judges
  • Reinaldo E. Rivera
  • Thomas A. Dickerson
  • Cheryl E. Chambers
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Click here to upload
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
  • Pegalis Erikson, LLC, Lake Success, N.Y. (Robert V. Fallarino and Linda M. Oliva of counsel), for appellant. Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman Dicker, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. (Garrett P. Lewis and John P. O'Sullivan of counsel), for respondent St. Luke's Roosevelt Hospital Center. Bower Lawrence, P.C., New York, N.Y. (Sari Havia of counsel), for respondent Dan Lazarescu, and McMahon Martine Gallagher, Brooklyn, N.Y., for respondent New York Medical Group, P.C. (one brief filed).
Judges
  • Reinaldo E. Rivera
  • Thomas A. Dickerson
  • Cheryl E. Chambers
See more information ...
Smart Summary

FRANCES ABEA MOORE, Appellant, v. ST. LUKE'S ROOSEVELT HOSPITAL CENTER et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

In response to the respondents' respective showings of their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against each of them, the plaintiff failed to show the existence of a triable issue of fact as to any of the respondents. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the respondents' separate motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against each of them ( see generally Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324-325).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.
Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

Comments

MOORE v. ST. LUKE'S ROOSEVELT HOSP
(Mar 17, 2009)