Bajana v. Presbyterian Hospital

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bajana v. Presbyterian Hospital

231 A.D.2d 464, 647 N.Y.S.2d 465, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9415

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

DecidedSeptember 24, 1996

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 231 A.D.2d 464 (Bajana v. Presbyterian Hospital) 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

Bajana v. Presbyterian Hospital, 231 A.D.2d 464, 647 N.Y.S.2d 465, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9415 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Lorraine Miller, J.), entered July 13, 1995, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The action was properly dismissed for plaintiff’s failure to present any factual support for the proposition that the unknown person who shot the decedent in the lobby of defendant’s apartment building was an intruder and not a building resident or guest of a resident. It is sheer speculation for plaintiff’s expert to opine that entry was gained through either the alleged defective sidewalk gate door or roof door (see, Wright v New York City Hous. Auth., 208 AD2d 327, 330-331; Schwartz v Niki Trading Corp., 222 AD2d 214, lv denied 87 NY2d 810). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Kupferman, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Lorraine Miller, J.), entered July 13, 1995, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The action was properly dismissed for plaintiff’s failure to present any factual support for the proposition that the unknown person who shot the decedent in the lobby of defendant’s apartment building was an intruder and not a building resident or guest of a resident. It is sheer speculation for plaintiff’s expert to opine that entry was gained through either the alleged defective sidewalk gate door or roof door (see, Wright v New York City Hous. Auth., 208 AD2d 327, 330-331; Schwartz v Niki Trading Corp., 222 AD2d 214, lv denied 87 NY2d 810). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Kupferman, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

231 A.D.2d 464, 647 N.Y.S.2d 465, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9415, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bajana-v-presbyterian-hospital-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack