Carmen Pesante v. Vertical Industrial Development Corp

75 N.E.3d 666, 29 N.Y.3d 983
New York Court of Appeals·Decided May 4, 2017·No. 86 SSM 10·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and the certified question answered in the affirmative.

Defendants Vertical Industrial Development Corp. and Rentar Development Corp. owed plaintiff a nondelegable duty to keep the premises safe (see Rosenberg v Equitable Life As *984 sur. Socy. of U.S., 79 NY2d 663, 668 [1992], rearg dismissed 82 NY2d 825 [1993]). Triable issues of fact exist regarding whether the security firm hired as an independent contractor by Vertical and Rentar was negligent in performing its duties and whether Vertical and Rentar could be held vicariously liable as a result. Accordingly, the Appellate Division properly denied the motion for summary judgment seeking dismissal of the complaint insofar as asserted against Vertical and Rentar.

Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Rivera, Stein, Fahey, Garcia and Wilson concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, with costs, and certified question answered in the affirmative, in a memorandum.

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

Carmen Pesante v. Vertical Industrial Development Corp, 75 N.E.3d 666, 29 N.Y.3d 983 (N.Y. 2017).

75 N.E.3d 666 (Carmen Pesante v. Vertical Industrial Development Corp) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ain v. Allstate Ins. Co.
2020 NY Slip Op 2042 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Monroy v. Lexington Operating Partners, LLC
2020 NY Slip Op 584 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2020)
Davis v. Eab-Tab Enters.
2018 NY Slip Op 8225 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)