Brewster v. Prince Apartments, Inc.

233 A.D.2d 194, 650 N.Y.S.2d 529, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11807
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Brewster v. Prince Apartments, Inc.. Read the opinion of the Court — 264 A.D.2d 611

Opinion

Order (denominated a judgment), Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.), entered on or about April 16, 1996, which denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We agree with the motion court’s conclusion that plaintiff submitted sufficient evidence to raise issues of fact as to whether her assailant was an intruder, rather than a guest in the building, who had gained access to the building through a broken front door, rather than through the bolted roof exit (cf., Wright v New York City Hous. Auth., 208 AD2d 327, 330). We have considered defendant’s other contentions, and find them to be without merit. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Milonas, Wallach, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Brewster v. Prince Apartments, Inc., 233 A.D.2d 194, 650 N.Y.S.2d 529, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11807 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

233 A.D.2d 194 (Brewster v. Prince Apartments, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wright v. New York City Housing Authority
208 A.D.2d 327 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)