Sakol v. Kirsch

25 A.D.3d 523, 808 N.Y.S.2d 224
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 31, 2006
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 25 A.D.3d 523 (Sakol v. Kirsch) 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
Sakol v. Kirsch, 25 A.D.3d 523, 808 N.Y.S.2d 224 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara R. Kapnick, J.), entered June 28, 2004, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted the motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against the corporate defendants, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In this action to recover damages for personal injuries suffered by plaintiff when she fell near the bottom of a winding staircase she was descending during a wedding reception at defendants’ mansion on the Hudson River, the motion court correctly found that the affidavit of plaintiff’s engineering expert was insufficient to defeat defendants’ motion for summary judgment inasmuch as it failed to set forth a violation of any specific safety guidelines in effect at the time of the mansion’s construction more than 100 years ago and prior to the adoption of building codes (see Jones v Presbyterian Hosp. in City of N.Y., 3 AD3d 225, 228 [2004]; Veccia v Clearmeadow Pistol Club, 300 AD2d 472 [2002]). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Friedman, Nardelli and Malone, JJ.

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

Related

Baker v. Roman Catholic Church of the Holy See
136 A.D.3d 596 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
25 A.D.3d 523, 808 N.Y.S.2d 224, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sakol-v-kirsch-nyappdiv-2006.