Regalado v. Independent Welding Supply Corp.

289 A.D.2d 124, 735 N.Y.S.2d 40, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12293
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 18, 2001
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 289 A.D.2d 124 (Regalado v. Independent Welding Supply 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
Regalado v. Independent Welding Supply Corp., 289 A.D.2d 124, 735 N.Y.S.2d 40, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12293 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Michael DeMarco, J.), entered on or about September 15, 2000, as amended by order entered September 26, 2000, which, in an action for personal injuries sustained when a cylinder containing propane gas attached to the stove in plaintiffs apartment exploded, insofar as appealed from, denied defendant-appellant distributor’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint [125]*125and all cross claims as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Appellant’s argument that the action should.be dismissed as against it because of plaintiffs failure to preserve the allegedly defective cylinder was properly rejected upon a record establishing that the cylinder was discarded or destroyed not by plaintiff but by the Police or Fire Department (see, Maliszewska v Potamkin N. Y. LP Mitsubishi Sterling, 281 AD2d 353) and that plaintiffs counsel unsuccessfully attempted to retrieve same. Appellant’s other argument that the action should be dismissed because plaintiffs storage of more than one pound of propane in his apartment was illegal (3 RCNY former 25-11 [b] [8], now 25-01 [c] [5] prohibiting containers of more than 16.4 ounces) was properly rejected on the ground that the use of propane gas in City apartments is an activity regulated, not prohibited. Accordingly, any unlawful conduct by plaintiff in bringing too large a cylinder into his apartment goes to the issue of comparative negligence (see, Barker v Kallash, 63 NY2d 19, 24). Concur — Lerner, J. P., Saxe, Buckley, Friedman and Mar-low, JJ.

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

Related

McMahon v. Ford Motor Co.
34 A.D.3d 263 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
289 A.D.2d 124, 735 N.Y.S.2d 40, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12293, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/regalado-v-independent-welding-supply-corp-nyappdiv-2001.