271 A.D.2d 516 (2000)

706 N.Y.S.2d 351

SAFEGUARD INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. E. TETZ & SONS, INC., Respondent. (And a Third-Party Action.)

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second Department.

Decided April 10, 2000.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The proponent of a motion for summary judgment must make a prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, and the failure to sustain this initial burden requires denial of the motion, regardless of the sufficiency of the opposing papers (see, Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320; Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557; Schwartz & Co. v G & H Real Estate Holding Corp., 265 A.D.2d 316). Contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the brief affidavit of its employee and the documentary evidence it submitted in support of its motion were insufficient to establish, as a matter of law, that it properly calculated the additional premiums allegedly due on the policy (see, St. Paul Fire & Mar. Ins. Co. v Capri Constr. Corp., 78 N.Y.2d 1016; cf., Family Coatings v Michigan Mut. Ins. Co., 170 A.D.2d 816). Accordingly, the Supreme Court did not err in denying the motion.


1000 Characters Remaining reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases