Robinson v. Donald C. Swanson, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Robinson v. Donald C. Swanson, Inc.

205 A.D.2d 678, 614 N.Y.S.2d 313, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6448

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

DecidedJune 20, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 205 A.D.2d 678 (Robinson v. Donald C. Swanson, Inc.) 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

Robinson v. Donald C. Swanson, Inc., 205 A.D.2d 678, 614 N.Y.S.2d 313, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6448 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Donovan, J.), entered July 23, 1992, which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff’s present and sole contention that the defendant was negligent in his exercise of control over the collapsed ceiling pursuant to the legal theory of res ipsa loquitur was not raised in the trial court and is not properly before this Court on appeal (see, Matter of Niblock v Niblock, 181 AD2d 825; Kramer v Interboro Mut. Indem. Ins. Co., 176 AD2d 308, 309; Modica v Zergebel, 140 AD2d 414; Fresh Pond Rd. Assocs. v Estate of Schacht, 120 AD2d 561). Mangano, P. J., Balletta, O’Brien, Hart and Florio, 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, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Donovan, J.), entered July 23, 1992, which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff’s present and sole contention that the defendant was negligent in his exercise of control over the collapsed ceiling pursuant to the legal theory of res ipsa loquitur was not raised in the trial court and is not properly before this Court on appeal (see, Matter of Niblock v Niblock, 181 AD2d 825; Kramer v Interboro Mut. Indem. Ins. Co., 176 AD2d 308, 309; Modica v Zergebel, 140 AD2d 414; Fresh Pond Rd. Assocs. v Estate of Schacht, 120 AD2d 561). Mangano, P. J., Balletta, O’Brien, Hart and Florio, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

205 A.D.2d 678, 614 N.Y.S.2d 313, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6448, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robinson-v-donald-c-swanson-inc-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack