Toscano v. Gambella

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Toscano v. Gambella

171 A.D.2d 860, 567 N.Y.S.2d 543, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3937

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

DecidedMarch 25, 1991

StatusPublished

This text of 171 A.D.2d 860 (Toscano v. Gambella) 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

Toscano v. Gambella, 171 A.D.2d 860, 567 N.Y.S.2d 543, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3937 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the third-party defendant Enterprises Packaging, Inc., appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (G. Aronin, J.), dated September 5, 1989, which denied its motion for summary judgment.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

On June 10, 1987, the plaintiff John Toscano was injured when he slipped and fell in the sprinkler room of a building owned by the defendant George Gambella. Gambella subsequently commenced a third-party action against Enterprises Packaging, Inc. (hereinafter Enterprises) which leased a portion of the subject premises, and Armstrong Paint Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (hereinafter Armstrong) which occupied the remaining portions of the building.

On appeal Enterprises contends that the Supreme Court erred in denying its motion for summary judgment because its lease did not include that portion of the premises where the plaintiff’s accident occurred. We disagree. Although Enterprises did not lease the sprinkler room, in view of its close [861]*861relationship to the third-party defendant Armstrong, triable issues of fact exist concerning whether Enterprises had access to and control over this portion of the premises. Accordingly, Enterprises’ motion for summary judgment was properly denied (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557). Mangano, P. J., Brown, Sullivan and Eiber, JJ., concur.

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

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the third-party defendant Enterprises Packaging, Inc., appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (G. Aronin, J.), dated September 5, 1989, which denied its motion for summary judgment.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

On June 10, 1987, the plaintiff John Toscano was injured when he slipped and fell in the sprinkler room of a building owned by the defendant George Gambella. Gambella subsequently commenced a third-party action against Enterprises Packaging, Inc. (hereinafter Enterprises) which leased a portion of the subject premises, and Armstrong Paint Manufacturing Co., Ltd. (hereinafter Armstrong) which occupied the remaining portions of the building.

On appeal Enterprises contends that the Supreme Court erred in denying its motion for summary judgment because its lease did not include that portion of the premises where the plaintiff’s accident occurred. We disagree. Although Enterprises did not lease the sprinkler room, in view of its close [861]*861relationship to the third-party defendant Armstrong, triable issues of fact exist concerning whether Enterprises had access to and control over this portion of the premises. Accordingly, Enterprises’ motion for summary judgment was properly denied (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557). Mangano, P. J., Brown, Sullivan and Eiber, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

171 A.D.2d 860, 567 N.Y.S.2d 543, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3937, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/toscano-v-gambella-nyappdiv-1991.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack