Majority
—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Steinhardt, J.), dated January 9, 1998, as denied their cross motion, inter alia, to strike the answer of the defendant Brooklyn Union Gas Company, and granted the cross motion of the defendant Brooklyn Union Gas Company for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contention, the cross motion of the defendant Brooklyn Union Gas Company (hereinafter Brooklyn Union) for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it was properly granted notwithstanding the fact that discovery had not yet been completed, since “ ‘there was only hope and speculation as to what additional discovery would uncover in the present situation’ ” (Quinones v Board of Educ., 248 AD2d 696 ; see, Mazzaferro v Barterama Corp., 218 AD2d 643 ; see also, Toth v Pergament Home Ctr., 250 AD2d 599 ).
Insofar as the plaintiffs contend that Brooklyn Union failed
Cases cited
- Quinones v. Board of Education 248 AD2d 696 p. 379
- Corriel v. Volkswagen of America, Inc. 127 AD2d 729 at 731 p. 380
- Lauro v. Top of the Class Caterers, Inc. 169 AD2d 708 p. 380
- Rosado v. Mercedes-Benz of North America, Inc. 103 AD2d 395 at 398 p. 380