Komanicky v Free

Annotate this Case
Komanicky v Free 2017 NY Slip Op 03099 Decided on April 20, 2017 Appellate Division, Third Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law ยง 431. This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.

Decided and Entered: April 20, 2017
523303

[*1]PAVEL KOMANICKY, Appellant,

v

MICHAEL FREE, Defendant, and WALTER R. ROJAS et al., Respondents.

Calendar Date: February 23, 2017
Before: Peters, P.J., McCarthy, Garry, Rose and Aarons, JJ.

Catherine E. Stuckart, Binghamton, for appellant.

O'Connor, O'Connor, Bresee & First, PC, Albany (Steven Auletta of counsel), for Walter R. Rojas, respondent.

Hinman, Howard & Kattell, LLP, Binghamton (Leslie P. Guy of counsel), for R. Barden and others, respondents.

Eric T. Schneiderman, Attorney General, Albany (Julie M. Sheridan of counsel), for Meg White, respondent.

Levene Gouldin & Thompson, LLP, Vestal (Justin L. Salkin of counsel), for Armando B. Mata, respondent.




Aarons, J.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Lebous, J.), entered September 3, 2015 in Broome County, which, among other things, granted defendants' motions to dismiss the complaint.

Plaintiff commenced this medical malpractice action against defendants stemming from alleged negligent treatment rendered in February 2012. Defendants subsequently moved via separate pre-answer motions seeking dismissal of the complaint based upon lack of personal jurisdiction, among other things. Supreme Court granted the motions, prompting this appeal by [*2]plaintiff.

For the reasons stated in Komanicky v Contractor (146 AD3d 1042 [2017]) related to personal jurisdiction, we affirm. In light of this determination, it is unnecessary for us to address the additional grounds raised by defendants for dismissal.

Peters, P.J., McCarthy, Garry and Rose, JJ., concur.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs.



Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.