TORRES v. CERGNUL, 30 N.Y.3d 1024 (2017)
Court: Court of Appeals of New York
Number: innyco20171212270
Visitors: 3
Filed: Dec. 12, 2017
Latest Update: Dec. 12, 2017
Summary: OPINION OF THE COURT On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, and certified question answered in the affirmative. Defendants Irene G. Cergnul, M.D., and Bronx-Lebanon Hospital Center did not preserve for our review their argument concerning the admissibility of the expert affidavit submitted by plaintiff in opposition to their motion for summary judgment. Moreover, defendant Bronx-Lebanon Hospital
Summary: OPINION OF THE COURT On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, and certified question answered in the affirmative. Defendants Irene G. Cergnul, M.D., and Bronx-Lebanon Hospital Center did not preserve for our review their argument concerning the admissibility of the expert affidavit submitted by plaintiff in opposition to their motion for summary judgment. Moreover, defendant Bronx-Lebanon Hospital C..
More
OPINION OF THE COURT
On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, and certified question answered in the affirmative. Defendants Irene G. Cergnul, M.D., and Bronx-Lebanon Hospital Center did not preserve for our review their argument concerning the admissibility of the expert affidavit submitted by plaintiff in opposition to their motion for summary judgment. Moreover, defendant Bronx-Lebanon Hospital Center has abandoned any other argument. On this record, triable questions of fact preclude summary judgment in favor of defendants.
Concur: Chief Judge DiFIORE and Judges RIVERA, STEIN, FAHEY, WILSON and FEINMAN concur; Judge GARCIA dissents and votes to reverse and answer the certified question in the negative, for reasons stated in the dissenting opinion by Justice Andrias at the Appellate Division (146 A.D.3d 509, 512-522 [2017]).
Source: Leagle
