More social networks New to Fancy? It is well established that a motion for leave to reargue is addressed to the sound discretion of the court and affords the moving party an opportunity to show that the court overlooked or misapprehended the facts or the law or for some other reason mistakenly arrived at its earlier decision see CPLR [d]; Doirio v City of New York, AD2d [2nd Dept ]. It is alleged that defendant’s daughter, Kit Yip, was the liaison for her mother since the latter did not speak English. Accordingly, defendant alleges that the Court erred in denying her motion for summary judgment on the basis of the Sepe affidavit. It is not to be used, however, as the means by which an unsuccessful party is permitted to argue again the same issues previously decided see Pro Brokerage v Home Ins. Sepe’s affidavit should be disregarded “as it refers to a document which is not only hearsay, but not even attached to the affirmation in opposition. More social networks Already on Fancy?
|License:||For Personal Use Only|
|iPhone 5, 5S resolutions||640×1136|
|iPhone 6, 6S resolutions||750×1334|
|iPhone 7, 7 Plus, 8, 8 Plus resolutions||1080×1920|
|Android Mobiles HD resolutions||360×640, 540×960, 720×1280|
|Android Mobiles Full HD resolutions||1080×1920|
|Mobiles HD resolutions||480×800, 768×1280|
|Mobiles QHD, iPhone X resolutions||1440×2560|
|HD resolutions||1280×720, 1366×768, 1600×900, 1920×1080, 2560×1440, Original|
Neill v Oakgrove Constr. Instead, defendant argued that Ms.
Wun Ying (@wunying) • Instagram photos and videos
In the alternative, plaintiff maintains that inadmissible evidence may be considered in opposition to a motion for summary judgment provided that it is not the only evidence relied upon.
In her reply papers on the original motion, defendant objected to the admissibility of Ms. In this regard, plaintiff points to the corroborating deposition testimony of defendant’s own witness, Yint Yip, who stated that on two occasions prior to the accident, Carol Ann Sepe had contacted her by telephone to complain about the carpet and to request that it be replaced because it yjng “old”.
You will earn Fancy credits when they complete a purchase.
More social networks Already on Fancy? Sepe was allegedly informed at that time that if she paid her rent on time for one or two years, sun carpet would be replaced.
A default judgment in the third-party action was entered against the third-party defendants on December 12, In this regard, it is not inappropriate to refer, by way of analogy, to the balancing of interests which a court must routinely undertake in discovery matters, where one party’s need for discovery is weighed against the special burden, if any, which it may impose on the other party see e.
Join Fancy Fancy is the place to discover and buy amazing things curated by our global community.
Sepe’s affidavit should be disregarded “as it refers to yibg document which is not only hearsay, but not even attached to the affirmation in opposition. Add this to your website by copying the code below. Sepe’s ability to testify at the time of trial or simply failed to address [this] issue” was not tendered on the original motion and, therefore, is not properly raised on reargument see Pryor v Commonwealth Land Title Ins.
Plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained when she slipped yong fell on defective carpeting covering the interior stairs of certain residential premises owned by defendant and located at Wirt Avenue, Staten Island, New York. Manifestly, a trial can be no less a search for fairness than the discovery proceedings which preceded it, nor may a litigant’s right to due process be thus impaired absent some overarching principle or purpose not evident in the case at bar.
Log In Interested in selling?
Dr. WUN-YING,DAI – Nobel Medical Group
Sepe attests that four months prior to the accident in question, she complained in a telephone conversation with the landlord’s daughter, Kit Yip who was known to Ms. Sepe’s affidavit on the sole ground that “[p]laintiff cannot create an issue of fact with a statement which relies on a hearsay document not even produced.
For more information, see Fancy Anywhere. In any event, were the issue properly before it, this Court does not perceive that the principles which bar a defaulting party from contesting the merits of an action in which he or she is a party should have any application to another cause of action, e. uwn
Policastro v Wun Ying Fung
The issue of whether or not Ms. About Fancy Anywhere Fancy Anywhere enables your visitors to buy things on Fancy directly from your own blogs and websites. On this basis, the moving defendant further contends that plaintiff’s only evidence in opposition to her prior motion, i.
Yint is alleged that defendant’s daughter, Kit Yip, was the liaison for her mother since the latter did not speak English. To get the best possible experience using Fancy we recommend that you upgrade to the latest version of Internet Explorer or other web browser.
Moreover, it is incontrovertible that defendant’s claim that the Court “either misapplied the law regarding Ms. Reset Password Back to Login. Your browser is out of date To whn the best possible experience using Fancy we recommend that you upgrade to the latest version of Internet Explorer or other web browser. Sepe further attests that several days after this telephone conversation, she received a letter signed by defendant Wun Ying Fung, confirming the telephone conversation. Sign up now Interested in selling?
It is not to be used, however, as the means by which jing unsuccessful party is permitted to argue again the same issues previously decided see Pro Brokerage v Home Ins. Reset email sent We will send a password wub link if this email is associated with a Fancy account. Accordingly, defendant alleges that the Court erred in denying her motion for summary judgment on the basis of the Sepe affidavit.
In the present application, movant yiing that in denying her prior yinf for summary judgment, the Court overlooked the basic principal that a defaulting party is precluded from testifying at the time of trial on the issue of liability and, therefore, plaintiff will be unable to prove notice of the alleged defective condition of the carpet. At the time, plaintiff, her mother and stepfather third-party defendants Carol Ann Sepe and Michael Sepe were tenants in the subject premises.