Altschul v. Bayit Plumbing & Heating, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Altschul v. Bayit Plumbing & Heating, Inc.

300 A.D.2d 162, 752 N.Y.S.2d 300, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12451

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 19, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 300 A.D.2d 162 (Altschul v. Bayit Plumbing & Heating, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Altschul v. Bayit Plumbing & Heating, Inc., 300 A.D.2d 162, 752 N.Y.S.2d 300, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12451 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Kibbie Payne, J.), entered February 9, 2001, after a jury trial, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss for plaintiffs’ failure to establish a prima facie case, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, defendant’s motion denied, the complaint reinstated, and the matter remanded for further proceedings.

Questions of fact are presented that cannot be resolved as a matter of law as to whether defendant’s employee was negligent when he invited Mrs. Altschul to clean the area where he had just removed the toilet from its mountings, leading to her cutting her right hand on some sharp pieces of porcelain. The questions presented are not beyond the ken of the typical juror and do not require expert testimony in order to prove a prima facie case. Concur — Andrias, J.P., Ellerin, Rubin and Gonzalez, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Kibbie Payne, J.), entered February 9, 2001, after a jury trial, which granted defendant’s motion to dismiss for plaintiffs’ failure to establish a prima facie case, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, defendant’s motion denied, the complaint reinstated, and the matter remanded for further proceedings.

Questions of fact are presented that cannot be resolved as a matter of law as to whether defendant’s employee was negligent when he invited Mrs. Altschul to clean the area where he had just removed the toilet from its mountings, leading to her cutting her right hand on some sharp pieces of porcelain. The questions presented are not beyond the ken of the typical juror and do not require expert testimony in order to prove a prima facie case. Concur — Andrias, J.P., Ellerin, Rubin and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

300 A.D.2d 162, 752 N.Y.S.2d 300, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12451, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/altschul-v-bayit-plumbing-heating-inc-nyappdiv-2002.