Martinez v. Herk Elevator Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Martinez v. Herk Elevator Co.

283 A.D.2d 263, 724 N.Y.S.2d 416, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5102

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

DecidedMay 17, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 283 A.D.2d 263 (Martinez v. Herk Elevator 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

Martinez v. Herk Elevator Co., 283 A.D.2d 263, 724 N.Y.S.2d 416, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5102 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Anne Targum, J.), entered October 25, 2000, which, to the extent appealed from, denied the motion of defendant Herk Elevator Co. for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Herk Elevator’s motion for summary judgment was properly denied in light of Herk’s repair records pertaining to the subject elevator indicating a misleveling problem and Herk’s failure to establish that it corrected that problem when it last serviced the elevator prior to plaintiff’s accident, the alleged result of the elevator’s misleveling (compare, Overholt v Atlas El. Co., 258 AD2d 887). Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Nardelli, Williams, Rubin and Marlow, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Anne Targum, J.), entered October 25, 2000, which, to the extent appealed from, denied the motion of defendant Herk Elevator Co. for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Herk Elevator’s motion for summary judgment was properly denied in light of Herk’s repair records pertaining to the subject elevator indicating a misleveling problem and Herk’s failure to establish that it corrected that problem when it last serviced the elevator prior to plaintiff’s accident, the alleged result of the elevator’s misleveling (compare, Overholt v Atlas El. Co., 258 AD2d 887). Concur — Sullivan, P. J., Nardelli, Williams, Rubin and Marlow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

283 A.D.2d 263, 724 N.Y.S.2d 416, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5102, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martinez-v-herk-elevator-co-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack