Case Name: Kirke Stanfield, Appellant, v. O & B Hacking Corp. et al., Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2015-01-28
Citations: 124 A.D.3d 869
Docket Number: 
Parties: Kirke Stanfield, Appellant, v O & B Hacking Corp. et al., Respondents.
Judges: Rivera, J.E, Dickerson, Roman and Cohen, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 124
Pages: 869–869

Head Matter:
Kirke Stanfield, Appellant, v O & B Hacking Corp. et al., Respondents.
[998 NYS2d 904] —

Opinion:
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Weiss, J.), entered June 26, 2013, which denied her motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
In support of her motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability, the plaintiff established her prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, including her freedom from comparative fault (see Kusz v New York City Tr. Auth., 88 AD3d 768 [2011]; Martinez v Kreychmar, 84 AD3d 1037, 1038 [2011]; Rosenblatt v Venizelos, 49 AD3d 519, 520 [2008]). However, in opposition thereto, the defendants raised a triable issue of fact, inter alia, as to how the subject accident occurred (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]; Battles v City of New York, 118 AD3d 650 [2014]).
The parties' remaining contentions are either without merit or need not be reached in light of our determination.
Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied the plaintiffs motion for summary judgment on the issue of liability.
Rivera, J.E, Dickerson, Roman and Cohen, JJ., concur.