Derezeas v. Robert H. Glover & Associates, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Derezeas v. Robert H. Glover & Associates, Inc.

121 A.D.3d 523, 993 N.Y.S.2d 635

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 16, 2014

Docket13231 101568/12

StatusPublished

This text of 121 A.D.3d 523 (Derezeas v. Robert H. Glover & Associates, Inc.) 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

Derezeas v. Robert H. Glover & Associates, Inc., 121 A.D.3d 523, 993 N.Y.S.2d 635 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louis B. York, J.), entered March 24, 2014, which denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant’s motion for summary judgment was properly denied in this action where plaintiff pedestrian was injured when an individual participating in defendant’s running class ran into her causing her to fall to the ground. The record shows that defendant supervised the group run, selected the route on an enclosed promenade at a relatively busy time of day, and provided coaches whose responsibilities included making sure the runners stayed to the left and warning of pedestrians or other hazards. According to the individual who ran into plaintiff, his position in the group of more than 50 runners made it impossible to see plaintiff until it was too late. Under the circumstances presented, defendant owed a duty of reasonable care to pedestrians sharing the esplanade with its running class, and triable issues of fact exist as to whether such duty was breached (see e.g. Hores v Sargent, 230 AD2d 712 [2d Dept 1996]).

Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Acosta, DeGrasse and ManzanetDaniels, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Louis B. York, J.), entered March 24, 2014, which denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant’s motion for summary judgment was properly denied in this action where plaintiff pedestrian was injured when an individual participating in defendant’s running class ran into her causing her to fall to the ground. The record shows that defendant supervised the group run, selected the route on an enclosed promenade at a relatively busy time of day, and provided coaches whose responsibilities included making sure the runners stayed to the left and warning of pedestrians or other hazards. According to the individual who ran into plaintiff, his position in the group of more than 50 runners made it impossible to see plaintiff until it was too late. Under the circumstances presented, defendant owed a duty of reasonable care to pedestrians sharing the esplanade with its running class, and triable issues of fact exist as to whether such duty was breached (see e.g. Hores v Sargent, 230 AD2d 712 [2d Dept 1996]).

Concur — Mazzarelli, J.E, Acosta, DeGrasse and ManzanetDaniels, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

121 A.D.3d 523, 993 N.Y.S.2d 635, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/derezeas-v-robert-h-glover-associates-inc-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack