DiGiacomo v. St. George Theatre Restoration Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

DiGiacomo v. St. George Theatre Restoration Corp.

2017 NY Slip Op 6060, 153 A.D.3d 599, 57 N.Y.S.3d 425

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

DecidedAugust 9, 2017

Docket2015-12663

StatusPublished

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 6060 (DiGiacomo v. St. George Theatre Restoration Corp.) 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

DiGiacomo v. St. George Theatre Restoration Corp., 2017 NY Slip Op 6060, 153 A.D.3d 599, 57 N.Y.S.3d 425 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant third-party plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Minardo, J.), dated November 25, 2015, as denied its motion, inter alia, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and the third-party defendant cross-appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of the same order as denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs to the plaintiff payable by the defendant third-party plaintiff and one bill of costs to the defendant third-party plaintiff payable by the third-party defendant.

On April 17, 2010, the plaintiff allegedly was injured when, after attending a performance at the St. George Theatre, on Staten Island, she tripped and fell on allegedly defective steps leading from the theatre lobby to the sidewalk. The plaintiff commenced this action against the owner of the property that housed the theatre, the St. George Theatre Restoration Corporation (hereinafter the defendant). The defendant, in turn, commenced a third-party action seeking contribution and indemnification from the third-party defendant, St. George Hyatt, LLC, which owned the separate parcel of property that housed the theatre lobby and steps. The defendant moved, inter alia, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and the third-party defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint.

The Supreme Court correctly denied the motions of the defendant and the third-party defendant, inasmuch as there are triable issues of fact as to, among other things, whether the steps presented a dangerous condition for which the defendant and the third-party defendant were potentially liable (see generally Basso v Miller, 40 NY2d 233 [1976]; cf. generally Fishelson v Kramer Props., LLC, 133 AD3d 706 [2015]).

Balkin, J.R, Roman, Sgroi and Duffy, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant third-party plaintiff appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Minardo, J.), dated November 25, 2015, as denied its motion, inter alia, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and the third-party defendant cross-appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of the same order as denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs to the plaintiff payable by the defendant third-party plaintiff and one bill of costs to the defendant third-party plaintiff payable by the third-party defendant.

On April 17, 2010, the plaintiff allegedly was injured when, after attending a performance at the St. George Theatre, on Staten Island, she tripped and fell on allegedly defective steps leading from the theatre lobby to the sidewalk. The plaintiff commenced this action against the owner of the property that housed the theatre, the St. George Theatre Restoration Corporation (hereinafter the defendant). The defendant, in turn, commenced a third-party action seeking contribution and indemnification from the third-party defendant, St. George Hyatt, LLC, which owned the separate parcel of property that housed the theatre lobby and steps. The defendant moved, inter alia, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and the third-party defendant moved for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint.

The Supreme Court correctly denied the motions of the defendant and the third-party defendant, inasmuch as there are triable issues of fact as to, among other things, whether the steps presented a dangerous condition for which the defendant and the third-party defendant were potentially liable (see generally Basso v Miller, 40 NY2d 233 [1976]; cf. generally Fishelson v Kramer Props., LLC, 133 AD3d 706 [2015]).

Balkin, J.R, Roman, Sgroi and Duffy, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2017 NY Slip Op 6060, 153 A.D.3d 599, 57 N.Y.S.3d 425, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/digiacomo-v-st-george-theatre-restoration-corp-nyappdiv-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack