McDonald v. Seminole Realty Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

McDonald v. Seminole Realty Co.

261 A.D.2d 454, 687 N.Y.S.2d 298, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4734

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

DecidedMay 10, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 261 A.D.2d 454 (McDonald v. Seminole 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

McDonald v. Seminole Realty Co., 261 A.D.2d 454, 687 N.Y.S.2d 298, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4734 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (LaTorella, J.), dated February 3, 1998, as denied that branch of their motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The plaintiff Sullivan McDonald allegedly was injured when floor sealer fumes ignited and then exploded while he was. applying the sealer on a floor in an apartment owned by the defendant Seminole Realty Co. and managed by the defendant Ditmas Management Corporation. The plaintiffs allege that the fire was caused by the acts of the defendants’ employees, and the defendants contend that the fire resulted from the injured plaintiff’s negligence.

On this record, we agree with the Supreme Court’s determination that summary judgment in favor of the defendants was not appropriate in light of the existence of triable issues of fact as to the cause of the fire and whether the defendants’ employees were acting within the scope of their employment when the accident occurred. Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Joy and Luciano, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (LaTorella, J.), dated February 3, 1998, as denied that branch of their motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The plaintiff Sullivan McDonald allegedly was injured when floor sealer fumes ignited and then exploded while he was. applying the sealer on a floor in an apartment owned by the defendant Seminole Realty Co. and managed by the defendant Ditmas Management Corporation. The plaintiffs allege that the fire was caused by the acts of the defendants’ employees, and the defendants contend that the fire resulted from the injured plaintiff’s negligence.

On this record, we agree with the Supreme Court’s determination that summary judgment in favor of the defendants was not appropriate in light of the existence of triable issues of fact as to the cause of the fire and whether the defendants’ employees were acting within the scope of their employment when the accident occurred. Bracken, J. P., Thompson, Joy and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 A.D.2d 454, 687 N.Y.S.2d 298, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4734, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcdonald-v-seminole-realty-co-nyappdiv-1999.