Brown v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Brown v. New York City Housing Authority

271 A.D.2d 631, 707 N.Y.S.2d 348, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4541

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

DecidedApril 24, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 271 A.D.2d 631 (Brown v. New York City Housing Authority) 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

Brown v. New York City Housing Authority, 271 A.D.2d 631, 707 N.Y.S.2d 348, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4541 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for wrongful death, etc., the defendant New York City Housing Authority appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.), entered June 21, 1999, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and . all cross claims insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs payable by the plaintiffs, the motion is granted, the complaint and all cross claims are dismissed insofar as asserted against the appellant, and the action against the remaining defendants is severed.

The plaintiffs alleged, inter alia, that neither elevator in the decedent’s apartment building, which was managed by the defendant New York City Housing Authority (hereinafter the NYCHA), was operational on the early morning of January 16, 1992, thereby delaying the arrival of paramedics. Contrary to the Supreme Court’s determination, no triable issue of fact was raised in opposition to the prima facie showing by the NYCHA that at least one elevator was working when the paramedics arrived and, thus, that the alleged dangerous condition did not exist (see, Pacht v International Bus. Machs., 228 AD2d 422; Morales v Hefran Realty Co., 202 AD2d 407). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, S. Miller and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for wrongful death, etc., the defendant New York City Housing Authority appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.), entered June 21, 1999, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and . all cross claims insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs payable by the plaintiffs, the motion is granted, the complaint and all cross claims are dismissed insofar as asserted against the appellant, and the action against the remaining defendants is severed.

The plaintiffs alleged, inter alia, that neither elevator in the decedent’s apartment building, which was managed by the defendant New York City Housing Authority (hereinafter the NYCHA), was operational on the early morning of January 16, 1992, thereby delaying the arrival of paramedics. Contrary to the Supreme Court’s determination, no triable issue of fact was raised in opposition to the prima facie showing by the NYCHA that at least one elevator was working when the paramedics arrived and, thus, that the alleged dangerous condition did not exist (see, Pacht v International Bus. Machs., 228 AD2d 422; Morales v Hefran Realty Co., 202 AD2d 407). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, S. Miller and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

271 A.D.2d 631, 707 N.Y.S.2d 348, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4541, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-new-york-city-housing-authority-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack