Lugo v. New York City Hous. Auth.
This text of 215 A.D.3d 490 (Lugo v. New York City Hous. Auth.) 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.
Opinion
| Lugo v New York City Hous. Auth. |
| 2023 NY Slip Op 01959 |
| Decided on April 18, 2023 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| Published by New York State Law Reporting Bureau pursuant to Judiciary Law § 431. |
| This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the Official Reports. |
Decided and Entered: April 18, 2023
Before: Kapnick, J.P., Moulton, Kennedy, Mendez, Pitt-Burke, JJ.
Index No. 26358/20E Appeal No. 68 Case No. 2022-04814
v
The New York City Housing Authority, Defendant-Appellant.
Wilson Elser Moskowitz Edelman & Dicker LLP, New York (Patrick J. Lawless of counsel), for appellant.
Law Offices of John P. Grill, P.C., Carmel (John P. Grill of counsel), for respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Leticia M. Ramirez, J.), entered on or about September 30, 2022, which denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Defendant did not satisfy its prima facie burden of establishing its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. Defendant failed to eliminate all issues of fact as to its notice of the deteriorated condition of the kitchen drainpipe, which resulted in a leak, causing plaintiff to slip and fall (see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 853 [1985]; see also Gordon v American Museum of Natural History, 67 NY2d 836, 837-838 [1986]). Defendant failed to address plaintiff's expert report, which was previously exchanged during discovery, and which concluded that the condition of the pipe was longstanding and should have been discovered and properly repaired prior to plaintiff's accident. In any event, even assuming that defendant met its initial burden, plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact by submitting the affidavit of the expert (see Hernandez v Aldus III Assoc., LP, 115 AD3d 529, 530 [1st Dept 2014]).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
ENTERED: April 18, 2023
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
215 A.D.3d 490, 186 N.Y.S.3d 205, 2023 NY Slip Op 01959, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lugo-v-new-york-city-hous-auth-nyappdiv-2023.