Blake v. University of Rochester

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Blake v. University of Rochester

304 A.D.2d 466, 758 N.Y.S.2d 323, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4249

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

DecidedApril 24, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 304 A.D.2d 466 (Blake v. University of Rochester) 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

Blake v. University of Rochester, 304 A.D.2d 466, 758 N.Y.S.2d 323, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4249 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Paula Omansky, J.), entered on or about July 25, 2002, granting defendant University of Rochester’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Although plaintiff alleges that but for defendant University’s failure to secure its premises adequately he would not have been assaulted at the University’s athletic facility during an intramural basketball game by a player on the opposing team, the record fails to disclose the existence of any triable issue as to whether inadequate premises security was a cause of plaintiffs harm. We are unable to discern any nonspeculative evidentiary basis for plaintiffs assertion that his assailant was an intruder who gained admission to defendant’s gymnasium by reason of lax security (see Sakhai v 411 E. 57th St. Corp., 272 AD2d 231, 233 [2000]). Concur — Buckley, P.J., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Wallach and Friedman, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Paula Omansky, J.), entered on or about July 25, 2002, granting defendant University of Rochester’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Although plaintiff alleges that but for defendant University’s failure to secure its premises adequately he would not have been assaulted at the University’s athletic facility during an intramural basketball game by a player on the opposing team, the record fails to disclose the existence of any triable issue as to whether inadequate premises security was a cause of plaintiffs harm. We are unable to discern any nonspeculative evidentiary basis for plaintiffs assertion that his assailant was an intruder who gained admission to defendant’s gymnasium by reason of lax security (see Sakhai v 411 E. 57th St. Corp., 272 AD2d 231, 233 [2000]). Concur — Buckley, P.J., Sullivan, Rosenberger, Wallach and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

304 A.D.2d 466, 758 N.Y.S.2d 323, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4249, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blake-v-university-of-rochester-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack