Lozano v. Mt. Hope Place Properties, Inc.

141 A.D.3d 455, 34 N.Y.S.3d 893
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJuly 14, 2016
Docket819 308544/10
StatusPublished

This text of 141 A.D.3d 455 (Lozano v. Mt. Hope Place Properties, 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
Lozano v. Mt. Hope Place Properties, Inc., 141 A.D.3d 455, 34 N.Y.S.3d 893 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2016).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Kenneth L. Thompson, Jr., J.), entered January 20, 2015, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendants established entitlement to judgment as a matter of law in this action where plaintiff alleges that he was injured when a portion of the bathroom ceiling in his apartment fell on his head. Defendants demonstrated that they had no notice of the alleged defective condition that caused the ceiling to collapse by submitting the deposition testimony of the building superintendent and plaintiff that there were no prior leaks or water staining present on the bathroom ceiling in the months prior to the accident (see Brown v Howson, 129 AD3d 570 [1st Dept 2015]; Figueroa v Goetz, 5 AD3d 164, 165 [1st Dept 2004]).

In opposition, plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact. Plaintiff does not contest that the underlying cause of the ceiling collapse was a bathtub overflowing in an apartment located two floors above earlier that day. Plaintiff presents nothing beyond mere speculation to support his assertion that the accident was related to defendants’ prior repairs of the ceiling because there *456 is nothing in the record to suggest that the condition that necessitated the prior repairs may have contributed to the leak (see Figueroa at 165).

We have considered plaintiff’s remaining arguments, and find them unavailing.

Concur — Tom, J.P., Andrias, Manzanet-Daniels, Kapnick and Gesmer, JJ.

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

Related

Figueroa v. Goetz
5 A.D.3d 164 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Brown v. Howson
129 A.D.3d 570 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
141 A.D.3d 455, 34 N.Y.S.3d 893, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lozano-v-mt-hope-place-properties-inc-nyappdiv-2016.