Wade Clark Mulcahy LLP

In New York, a defendant has several options in seeking to dismiss a civil lawsuit – a motion to dismiss or a motion for summary judgment. Generally, a motion to dismiss challenges the legal sufficiency of a complaint while a summary judgment motion challenges the merits of the case. While summary judgment can dispose of some or all claims in a lawsuit with prejudice, courts are hesitant to award such relief where the parties have not completed discovery relevant to the issues.

For example, in Knowles v 21-43 27th St., a United States Postal Service employee was injured while delivering mail at the defendants’ apartment building when a mailbox receptacle fell on her. After some discovery had been completed, defendants moved for summary judgment on the basis that they had no actual or constructive notice of the allegedly hazardous condition. The Queens County Supreme Court denied the motion.

The Second Department affirmed but amended the Order to add that the motion was denied “as premature, without prejudice to renewal following the completion of discovery.” In so holding, the Court noted that a party who contends that a summary judgment motion is premature is required to demonstrate that “discovery might lead to relevant evidence or the facts essential to justify opposition to the motion were exclusively within the knowledge and control of the movant." The Court found that the plaintiff was able to demonstrate that further discovery, including production of postal records and a deposition of plaintiff’s former coworker, may result in the disclosure of evidence on the issue of notice so the motion was indeed premature.

Knowles serves as a reminder that summary judgment will not be awarded where discovery as to the issue at hand is outstanding, particularly where the key facts are only known to an adverse party. At a minimum, parties should have an opportunity to complete the necessary fact-finding before a court will consider summary judgment.