Medina v. 203 West 109th Street Realty Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Medina v. 203 West 109th Street Realty Corp.

16 A.D.3d 220, 790 N.Y.S.2d 663, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2491

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

DecidedMarch 15, 2005

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 16 A.D.3d 220 (Medina v. 203 West 109th Street Realty Corp.) 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

Medina v. 203 West 109th Street Realty Corp., 16 A.D.3d 220, 790 N.Y.S.2d 663, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2491 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Janice L. Bowman, J.), entered on or about January 7, 2004, which, to the extent appealed from, denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff seeks recovery for personal injuries sustained when she fell in her bathroom while attempting to escape a jet of hot water from the showerhead. There are triable issues of fact, including whether defendant had notice of the allegedly defective condition of the sink which gave way and whether such defect was a proximate cause of the accident (Weisbart v Hudson Manor Terrace Corp., 299 AD2d 160 [2002]). Furthermore, the parties’ submissions present issues of witness credibility that cannot be resolved on a motion for summary judgment (Santos v Temco Serv. Indus., 295 AD2d 218 [2002]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Marlow, Sullivan, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Janice L. Bowman, J.), entered on or about January 7, 2004, which, to the extent appealed from, denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff seeks recovery for personal injuries sustained when she fell in her bathroom while attempting to escape a jet of hot water from the showerhead. There are triable issues of fact, including whether defendant had notice of the allegedly defective condition of the sink which gave way and whether such defect was a proximate cause of the accident (Weisbart v Hudson Manor Terrace Corp., 299 AD2d 160 [2002]). Furthermore, the parties’ submissions present issues of witness credibility that cannot be resolved on a motion for summary judgment (Santos v Temco Serv. Indus., 295 AD2d 218 [2002]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Marlow, Sullivan, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 A.D.3d 220, 790 N.Y.S.2d 663, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2491, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/medina-v-203-west-109th-street-realty-corp-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack