Carmen Pesante v. Vertical Industrial Development Corp
This text of 75 N.E.3d 666 (Carmen Pesante v. Vertical Industrial Development Corp) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
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.
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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
75 N.E.3d 666, 29 N.Y.3d 983, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carmen-pesante-v-vertical-industrial-development-corp-ny-2017.