Denicola v. Costello

44 A.D.3d 990, 844 N.Y.S.2d 438
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 30, 2007
StatusPublished
Cited by23 cases

This text of 44 A.D.3d 990 (Denicola v. Costello) 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
Denicola v. Costello, 44 A.D.3d 990, 844 N.Y.S.2d 438 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Johnson, J.), dated May 18, 2006, as granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The defendant established his prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that the injured plaintiff was unable to identify the cause of her fall (see Bottiglieri v Wheeler, 38 AD3d 818 [2007]; Lissauer v Shaarei Halacha, Inc., 37 AD3d 427 [2007]; Rodriguez v Cafaro, 17 AD3d 658 [2005]; Birman v Birman, 8 AD3d 219 [2004]). In opposition, the plaintiffs failed to submit evidence sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact. The affidavit submitted by the injured plaintiff in opposition to the motion merely raised a feigned factual issue designed to avoid the consequences of her earlier deposition testimony (see Tejada v Jonas, 17 AD3d 448 [2005]; Hartman v Mountain Val. Brew Pub, 301 AD2d 570 [2003]; Koller v Leone, 299 AD2d 396 [2002]; Capraro v Staten Is. Univ. Hosp., 245 AD2d 256 [1997]). The plaintiffs also submitted an affidavit of an expert who alleged that the staircase was in violation of various provisions of the Administrative Code of the City of New York. However, since the injured plaintiff did not know what caused her to fall, and did not claim at her deposition that she would not have fallen if handrails had been in place, it would be speculative to assume that these alleged violations proximately caused her fall (see Guiterrez v Iannacci 43 AD3d 868 [2007]; Lissauer v Shaarei Halacha, Inc., 37 [991]*991AD3d 427 [2007]; Birman v Birman, 8 AD3d 219 [2004]; Bitterman v Grotyohann, 295 AD2d 383 [2002]). Prudenti, P.J., Fisher, Dillon and Carni, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Perrelli v. Evangelista
2019 NY Slip Op 1807 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2019)
Burns v. Linden St. Realty, LLC
2018 NY Slip Op 6876 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2018)
Meriweather v. Green West 57th Street, LLC
2017 NY Slip Op 9121 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Capasso v. Capasso
84 A.D.3d 997 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Yefet v. Shalmoni
81 A.D.3d 637 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Aguilar v. Anthony
80 A.D.3d 544 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Anderson v. Columbari
79 A.D.3d 679 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Murphy v. New York City Transit Authority
73 A.D.3d 1143 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Harris v. Five Point Mission—Camp Olmstedt
73 A.D.3d 1127 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Russ v. Fried
73 A.D.3d 1153 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Theresa Striano Revocable Trust v. Blancato
71 A.D.3d 1122 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Patterson v. Corner Rock Realty, Inc.
71 A.D.3d 969 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Martone v. Shields
71 A.D.3d 840 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Levine v. Kadison
70 A.D.3d 651 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Bolde v. Borgata Hotel Casino & Spa
70 A.D.3d 617 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Mitthauer v. T. Moriarty & Son, Inc.
69 A.D.3d 588 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Kaplan v. Great Neck Donuts, Inc.
68 A.D.3d 931 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Knox v. United Christian Church of God, Inc.
65 A.D.3d 1017 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Owusu v. LSS Leasing Ltd. Liability Co.
64 A.D.3d 759 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)
Hunt v. Meyers
63 A.D.3d 685 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
44 A.D.3d 990, 844 N.Y.S.2d 438, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/denicola-v-costello-nyappdiv-2007.