Majority
—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant Nock Brother Fine Landscaping Service appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (D’Emilio, J.), dated March 7, 1997, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the amended complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against it.
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, the complaint and all cross claims are dismissed insofar as asserted against the appellant, and the action against the remaining defendant is severed.
Nock Brother Fine Landscaping Service has demonstrated its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law with respect to the assertion that it committed no acts of negligence in snow plowing certain residential premises (see, Gentile v Rotterdam Sq., 226 AD2d 973 ; Kay v Flying Goose, 203 AD2d 332 ; see also, DeCurtis v T.
Cases cited
- Gentile v. Rotterdam Square 226 AD2d 973 p. 388
- Kay v. Flying Goose, Inc. 203 AD2d 332 p. 388
- Kazakias v. Bistricer 180 AD2d 666 p. 389
- Andre v. Pomeroy 35 NY2d 361 at 364 p. 389
- S. J. Capelin Associates, Inc. v. Globe Manufacturing Corp. 34 NY2d. 338 p. 389
- Rotuba Extruders, Inc. v. Ceppos 46 NY2d 223 at 231 p. 389
- Colonial Commercial Corp. v. Breskel Associates 238 AD2d 539 p. 389