Key Takeaway
NY Court rules excerpts of deposition testimony sufficient for summary judgment motions, contrary to common belief that entire transcript required.
Pankratov v 2935 OP, LLC, 2018 NY Slip Op 02479 (2d Dept. 2018)
“In support of its motion, the defendant submitted excerpts of the plaintiff’s deposition transcript which demonstrated, prima facie, that the plaintiff was unable to identify the cause of his fall without resorting to speculation (see Razza v LP Petroleum Corp., 153 AD3d 740, 741; Amster v Kromer, 150 AD3d 804, 804; Hoovis v Grand City 99 Cents Store, Inc., 146 AD3d 866, 866; Hahn v Go Go Bus Tours, Inc., 144 AD3d 748, 749; Giordano v Giordano, 140 AD3d 699, 700). In opposition, however, the plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact in this regard by submitting a complete copy of his deposition transcript. When the entirety of that transcript is reviewed, it is clear that the plaintiff identified transparent ice as the cause of his fall. Contrary to the defendant’s contention, such testimony correlates to the plaintiff’s averments regarding the cause of his fall which were set forth in his subsequent affidavit.”
I always thought (and now incorrectly) that a party seeking to use EBT testimony in support (or in opposition) needed to include the entire deposition transcript. It was always dicey to pick the pieces of the EBT you want to insert in the motion. The court, however, sees this as being alright.
Related Articles
- Appellate Term holds CPLR 3212(f) relief is inappropriate under three separate circumstances
- NY EBT Venue Rules: When Courts Grant Undue Hardship Exceptions for Depositions
- Remote Depositions for International Parties: Legal Precedent from Long Island and NYC Courts
- The failure of an assignor to appear for an EBT is not a basis for a 3126 sanction against the assignee
