Postilio v Deblasi

Postilio v Deblasi 2014 NY Slip Op 02565 Decided on April 16, 2014 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided on April 16, 2014
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORKAPPELLATE DIVISION : SECOND JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
WILLIAM F. MASTRO, J.P.
RUTH C. BALKIN
SANDRA L. SGROI
HECTOR D. LASALLE, JJ.
2013-09349
(Index No. 700270/13)

[*1]Rose Postilio, plaintiff-respondent,

v

Nicholas Deblasi, et al., defendants-respondents, Getty Realty Corp., etc., et al., appellants.




Lester Schwab Katz & Dwyer, LLP, New York, N.Y. (Harry
Steinberg and Daniel S. Kotler of counsel), for appellants.


DECISION & ORDER

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants Getty Realty Corp. and Getty Petroleum Corp. appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Flug, J.), dated August 12, 2013, which denied, without prejudice to renewal upon the completion of discovery, their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against them.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

"CPLR 3212(f) permits a party opposing summary judgment to obtain further discovery when it appears that facts supporting the position of the opposing party exist but cannot be stated" (Juseinoski v New York Hosp. Med. Ctr. of Queens, 29 AD3d 636, 637). "This is especially so where the opposing party has not had a reasonable opportunity for disclosure prior to the making of the motion" (Baron v Incorporated Vil. of Freeport, 143 AD2d 792, 793). Here, the plaintiff raised issues warranting further discovery.

The appellants' remaining contentions are without merit.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly denied, without prejudice to renewal upon the completion of discovery, the appellants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against them (see Fazio v Brandywine Realty Trust, 29 AD3d 939; Juseinoski v New York Hosp. Med. Ctr. of Queens, 29 AD3d at 637; Baron v Incorporated Vil. of Freeport, 143 AD2d at 792-793).
MASTRO, J.P., BALKIN, SGROI and LASALLE, JJ., concur.

ENTER:

Aprilanne Agostino [*2]

Clerk of the Court