Ezzard v. One East River Place Realty Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ezzard v. One East River Place Realty Co.

80 A.D.3d 515, 914 N.Y.S.2d 635

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

DecidedJanuary 20, 2011

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 80 A.D.3d 515 (Ezzard v. One East River Place Realty Co.) 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

Ezzard v. One East River Place Realty Co., 80 A.D.3d 515, 914 N.Y.S.2d 635 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marylin G. Diamond, J.), entered April 16, 2010, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied that part of the motion of defendants-appellants for an order directing defendant New York Elevator & Electrical Corp. (NYE) to assume their defense against the claims brought by plaintiff, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The motion was properly denied in this action where plaintiff was allegedly injured when she tripped and fell while exiting an elevator car. Because there has been no showing that NYE was negligent or that appellants were not negligent, any order requiring NYE to defend is premature (see Inner City Redevelopment Corp. v Thyssenkrupp El. Corp., 78 AD3d 613 [1st Dept 2010]; see also Bellefleur v Newark Beth Israel Med. Ctr., 66 AD3d 807, 809 [2009]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Friedman, Renwick and DeGrasse, JJ.

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

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marylin G. Diamond, J.), entered April 16, 2010, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied that part of the motion of defendants-appellants for an order directing defendant New York Elevator & Electrical Corp. (NYE) to assume their defense against the claims brought by plaintiff, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The motion was properly denied in this action where plaintiff was allegedly injured when she tripped and fell while exiting an elevator car. Because there has been no showing that NYE was negligent or that appellants were not negligent, any order requiring NYE to defend is premature (see Inner City Redevelopment Corp. v Thyssenkrupp El. Corp., 78 AD3d 613 [1st Dept 2010]; see also Bellefleur v Newark Beth Israel Med. Ctr., 66 AD3d 807, 809 [2009]). Concur — Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Friedman, Renwick and DeGrasse, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

80 A.D.3d 515, 914 N.Y.S.2d 635, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ezzard-v-one-east-river-place-realty-co-nyappdiv-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack