Diakakis v. Bedrick

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Diakakis v. Bedrick

236 A.D.2d 274, 653 N.Y.S.2d 574, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1255

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

DecidedFebruary 18, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 236 A.D.2d 274 (Diakakis v. Bedrick) 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

Diakakis v. Bedrick, 236 A.D.2d 274, 653 N.Y.S.2d 574, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1255 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan Saks, J.), entered on or about May 8,1996, which granted defendant Bedrick’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against her, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The injured plaintiff, a doorman at defendant Bedrick’s building, commenced this action to recover for injuries sustained as a result of an alleged assault by defendant Hume in the lobby of the building as Hume, who was alleged to have been intoxicated, left a New Year’s Eve party held in defendant Bedrick’s apartment located on the 31st floor. The court correctly held that defendant-respondent Bedrick, as a tenant shareholder in the cooperative apartment building, could not be held liable for injuries, occurring outside of her apartment in an area of the building not under her control, caused by a guest whom she had no opportunity to supervise (D'Amico v Christie, 71 NY2d 76, 85-87). Concur—Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan Saks, J.), entered on or about May 8,1996, which granted defendant Bedrick’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against her, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The injured plaintiff, a doorman at defendant Bedrick’s building, commenced this action to recover for injuries sustained as a result of an alleged assault by defendant Hume in the lobby of the building as Hume, who was alleged to have been intoxicated, left a New Year’s Eve party held in defendant Bedrick’s apartment located on the 31st floor. The court correctly held that defendant-respondent Bedrick, as a tenant shareholder in the cooperative apartment building, could not be held liable for injuries, occurring outside of her apartment in an area of the building not under her control, caused by a guest whom she had no opportunity to supervise (D'Amico v Christie, 71 NY2d 76, 85-87). Concur—Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

236 A.D.2d 274, 653 N.Y.S.2d 574, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1255, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/diakakis-v-bedrick-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack