Francis v. Ocean Village Apartments

222 A.D.2d 551, 635 N.Y.S.2d 262, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12976
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 18, 1995
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 222 A.D.2d 551 (Francis v. Ocean Village Apartments) 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
Francis v. Ocean Village Apartments, 222 A.D.2d 551, 635 N.Y.S.2d 262, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12976 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Krausman, J.), dated October 12, 1993, which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

To recover damages from an owner of real property for injuries caused by the acts of criminals on the premises, a plaintiff must produce evidence indicating that the owner knew or should have known of the probability of conduct on the part of third persons which was likely to endanger the safety of those lawfully on the premises (see, Jacqueline S. v City of New [552]*552York, 81 NY2d 288, 294-295; Nallan v Helmsley-Spear, Inc., 50 NY2d 507, 519-520). Here, because the plaintiff did not submit evidence of prior criminal activity in her apartment complex, she failed to raise an issue of fact as to whether the security measures provided by the defendants were appropriate (see, Iannelli v Powers, 114 AD2d 157, 162-163). The Supreme Court therefore properly granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562). Moreover, we find no improvident exercise of the Supreme Court’s discretion in granting the plaintiff only a brief adjournment to prepare a response to the defendants’ motion rather than the lengthy adjournment which the plaintiff requested. O’Brien, J. P., Copertino, Santucci and Joy, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Golub v. Louris
2017 NY Slip Op 6353 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2017)
Weitz v. State
182 Misc. 2d 320 (New York State Court of Claims, 1999)
Telfair v. City of New York
261 A.D.2d 607 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Gordon v. Foster Apartments Group
260 A.D.2d 540 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Rios v. Jackson Associates
259 A.D.2d 608 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)
Senises v. Lee
251 A.D.2d 649 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Green v. Grand Baldwin Associates
247 A.D.2d 511 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Segale v. Nu Wave Marine, Inc.
244 A.D.2d 326 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Canela v. Wavecrest Management Team
241 A.D.2d 506 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Howard-Seay v. Dorchester Towers Associates
227 A.D.2d 525 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
222 A.D.2d 551, 635 N.Y.S.2d 262, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12976, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/francis-v-ocean-village-apartments-nyappdiv-1995.