Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Jessica Sierra, Plaintiff, 590040/12 v. Ogden Cap Properties, LLC, et al., Defendants–Respondents, Emblemhealth Services Company, LLP, et al., Defendants. Ogden Cap Properties, LLC, et al., Third–Party Plaintiffs–Respondents, -against- Health Insurance Plan of Greater New York, Third–Party Defendant, Lenox Hill Hospital, Third–Party Defendant–Appellant.—–—–—[And A Second Third–Party Action]
_
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan M. Kenney, J.), entered July 14, 2014, which denied defendant/third-party defendant Lenox Hill Hospital's 1 motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all other claims against it and its application for leave to submit a new dispositive motion following the completion of discovery, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The motion court correctly found that Lenox Hill failed to establish prima facie that its sublease had expired before plaintiff's 2009 accident. While the initial term of the sublease expired in 2006, the sublease provided for automatic renewals, and indicated that it was co-terminous with the within-referenced Health Care Services Agreement between Lenox Hill and codefendant Health Insurance Plan of Greater New York. In support of its motion, Lenox Hill submitted the sublease and an affidavit asserting that the Health Care Services Agreement was terminated on July 31, 2006. However, it did not submit the Health Care Services Agreement itself. The motion court correctly determined that that omission was fatal to the motion.
We decline to consider Lenox Hill's argument as to standing, which it raised for the first time in its reply brief. We have considered Lenox Hill's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.
_
CLERK
FOOTNOTES
FN1. Lenox Hill Hospital, among other parties, was named as a defendant in the second amended complaint. It was omitted as a defendant from the consolidated caption due to a clerical error.. FN1. Lenox Hill Hospital, among other parties, was named as a defendant in the second amended complaint. It was omitted as a defendant from the consolidated caption due to a clerical error.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: 56
Decided: January 28, 2016
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)