Case Name: Abraham Lichtenstein et al., Respondents, v. Richard Perfit et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1998-03-23
Citations: 248 A.D.2d 596
Docket Number: 
Parties: Abraham Lichtenstein et al., Respondents, v Richard Perfit et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.
Judges: Rosenblatt, J. P., Sullivan, Joy, Altman and Luciano, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 248
Pages: 596–596

Head Matter:
Abraham Lichtenstein et al., Respondents, v Richard Perfit et al., Appellants, et al., Defendants.
[669 NYS2d 918]

Opinion:
—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants Richard Perfit, Alice Wetchler, Martin Perfit, and Ram Realty Associates appeal from so much of an order of Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.), dated January 24, 1997, as denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
The Supreme Court properly denied the appellants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them since there are material issues of fact which require a trial (see, CPLR 3212 [b]).
Rosenblatt, J. P., Sullivan, Joy, Altman and Luciano, JJ., concur.