Caraballo v. Kingsbridge Apt. Corp.

59 A.D.3d 270, 873 N.Y.S.2d 299
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedFebruary 19, 2009
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 59 A.D.3d 270 (Caraballo v. Kingsbridge Apt. Corp.) 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
Caraballo v. Kingsbridge Apt. Corp., 59 A.D.3d 270, 873 N.Y.S.2d 299 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2009).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Mark Friedlander, J.), entered November 15, 2007, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Elaintiff was injured when he allegedly slipped on an interior stairway step in defendant’s apartment building, causing him to fall and land on a platform several steps below. Following defendant’s prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment, plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether defendant’s negligence caused plaintiffs injury. During his 2005 deposition, plaintiff was unable to identify any dangerous condition that caused him to slip, stating that he did not see any water on the step where he slipped and only saw a “puddle” on the platform where he finally landed. While plaintiff introduced two tenants’ affidavits that alleged general wetness on the staircase following rainfall, these affidavits not only directly contradicted plaintiff’s sworn testimony two years earlier, but failed to mention any complaints made by the affiants to defendant concerning such alleged conditions. Such self-serving affidavits denote an effort to avoid the consequences of plaintiff’s earlier testimony and are insufficient to defeat defendant’s motion for summary judgment. (See Amaya v Denihan Ownership Co., LLC, 30 AD3d 327, 327-328 [2006]; Harty v Lenci, 294 AD2d 296, 298 [2002]; Phillips v Bronx Lebanon Hosp., 268 AD2d 318, 320 [2000].) Further, mere speculation and conjecture, rather than admissible evidence, is insufficient to sustain the action (see Mandel v 370 Lexington Ave., LLC, 32 AD3d 302, 303 [2006]; Kane v Estia Greek Rest., 4 [271]*271AD3d 189, 190 [2004]; Segretti v Shorenstein Co., E., 256 AD2d 234, 235 [1998]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.E, Friedman, Gonzalez, Catterson and Renwick, JJ.

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

Related

Aguaisa v. 33 E. 22nd St. Acquisition, LLC
2025 NY Slip Op 30173(U) (New York Supreme Court, New York County, 2025)
Hughey v. Brown Bros. Harriman & Co.
2024 NY Slip Op 33431(U) (New York Supreme Court, New York County, 2024)
Bolouvi v. Brown Bros. Harriman & Co.
2024 NY Slip Op 33427(U) (New York Supreme Court, New York County, 2024)
Biaca-Neto v. Boston Rd. II Hous. Dev. Fund Corp.
2019 NY Slip Op 6142 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Unclaimed Prop. Recovery Serv., Inc. v. Credit Suisse First Boston Corp.
2019 NY Slip Op 3547 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Lowenstern v. Sherman Sq. Realty Corp.
2018 NY Slip Op 6616 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Santiago v. Pioneer Transp. Corp.
2018 NY Slip Op 79 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Sewesky v. City of New York
140 A.D.3d 666 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)
Hoffer-Adou v. Adou
121 A.D.3d 618 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2014)
Roimesher v. Colgate Scaffolding & Equipment Corp.
77 A.D.3d 425 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Rodriguez v. 520 Audubon Associates
71 A.D.3d 417 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Shapiro v. Boulevard Housing Corp.
70 A.D.3d 474 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
59 A.D.3d 270, 873 N.Y.S.2d 299, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/caraballo-v-kingsbridge-apt-corp-nyappdiv-2009.