Castillo-Moran v. Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J.

2019 NY Slip Op 4105
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 28, 2019
Docket9438 300561/15
StatusPublished

This text of 2019 NY Slip Op 4105 (Castillo-Moran v. Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J.) 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
Castillo-Moran v. Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J., 2019 NY Slip Op 4105 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2019).

Opinion

Castillo-Moran v Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J. (2019 NY Slip Op 04105)
Castillo-Moran v Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J.
2019 NY Slip Op 04105
Decided on May 28, 2019
Appellate Division, First Department
Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431.
This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports.


Decided on May 28, 2019
Sweeny, J.P., Richter, Kapnick, Oing, Singh, JJ.

9438 300561/15

[*1]Raymer Castillo-Moran, Plaintiff-Respondent,

v

The Port Authority of New York & New Jersey, et al., Defendants, American Airlines, Inc., Defendant-Appellant.


Condon & Forsyth LLP, New York (Michael G. Koueiter of counsel), for appellant.

Kalra Law Firm, Forest Hills (Neil Kalra of counsel), for respondent.



Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Donald A. Miles, J.), entered on or about August 29, 2018, which, to the extent appealed from, denied defendant American Airline Inc.'s (American) motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court correctly denied American's motion for summary judgment, as the movant failed to demonstrate, as a matter of law, the absence of any material issue of fact (see Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562-563 [1980]). The record does not permit resolution of whether it was foreseeable that an airport worker such as plaintiff would exit his vehicle to walk to another vehicle in the restricted "safety area" where plaintiff slipped and fell (see Basso v Miller, 40 NY2d 233, 241 [1976]), as well as whether it was reasonable for American to have waited more than two hours from the end of the snowfall to address the icy condition (see Gonzalez v American Oil Co., 42 AD3d 235, 256 [1st Dept 2007]).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

ENTERED: MAY 28, 2019

CLERK



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

Related

Basso v. Miller
352 N.E.2d 868 (New York Court of Appeals, 1976)
Zuckerman v. City of New York
404 N.E.2d 718 (New York Court of Appeals, 1980)
People v. Dickerson
42 A.D.3d 228 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2019 NY Slip Op 4105, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/castillo-moran-v-port-auth-of-ny-nj-nyappdiv-2019.