Search for: "Suppiah v Kalish"
Results 1 - 10
of 10
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
14 Jun 2012, 3:15 am
"Here, the Supreme Court properly determined that the defendant Arthur Welsher failed to establish, prima facie, that the plaintiffs Tibor Gershkovich and Galina Gershkovich (hereinafter together the respondents) were unable to prove the essential elements of their legal malpractice cause of action insofar as asserted against that defendant (see Gelobter v Fox, 90 AD3d [*2]829, 831; Suppiah v Kalish, 76 AD3d 829, 832; Ali v Fink, 67 AD3d 935,… [read post]
7 Jan 2011, 2:02 pm
The follwing cases were granted leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals by the First Department: Suppiah v. [read post]
1 Aug 2012, 2:51 am
Plaintiff argues, citing Suppiah v Kalish (76 AD3d 829, 832 [2010]) that defendant was required to submit an expert affidavit establishing that even if he did commit malpractice, his actions were not the proximate cause of its losses. [read post]
5 Sep 2012, 3:04 am
” Suppiah v Kalish, 76 AD3d 829, 832 (Is* Dept 2010). [read post]
7 Jun 2023, 4:20 am
Defendant did not satisfy its prima facie burden of establishing its entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the complaint as a matter of law, as defendant failed to submit an expert opinion demonstrating that it did not perform below the ordinary reasonable skill and care possessed by an average member of the legal community (see Suppiah v Kalish, 76 AD3d 829, 832 [1st Dept 2010]). [read post]
9 Sep 2010, 1:32 am
Kalish, 103367/05 Supreme Court, New York County: Part 35Government NYPD Ordered to Disclose Documents Related to Arrests at S&M Clubs, But Not Internal Manual Urban Justice Center v. [read post]
10 Sep 2010, 3:07 am
" In Suppiah v Kalish , 2010 NY Slip Op 06540 , Decided on September 7, 2010 , Appellate Division, First Department defendant moved for summary judgment and plaintiff opposed the motion with the affidavit of an expert and some other affidavits. [read post]
6 Nov 2012, 3:06 am
Inasmuch as defendants failed to shift the burden to plaintiff [*3]to demonstrate a departure from the standard of care, the motion for summary judgment should have been denied (see Suppiah v Kalish, 76 AD3d 829, 832 [2010]; Ehlinger v Ruberti, Girvin & Ferlazzo, 304 AD2d at 927; Estate of Nevelson v Carro, Spanbock, Kaster & Cuiffo, 259 AD2d 282, 284 [1999]). [read post]
1 Feb 2021, 5:47 am
” (Suppiah v Kalish, 76 AD3d 829, 832 [1st Dept 2010] [reversing grant of summary judgment on malpractice claim].) [read post]
23 May 2019, 4:39 am
Since, without the expert affidavit, defendants failed to meet their prima facie burden, their motion must be denied without regard to the sufficiency of plaintiffs’ opposition papers (see Suppiah v Kalish,76 AD3d 829, 832 [1st Dept 2010][“By failing to submit the affidavit of an expert, defendant never shifted the burden to plaintiff’]; see generally Winegrad v New York Univ. [read post]
