Valdez v. 72 & 82 Terrace Realty, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Valdez v. 72 & 82 Terrace Realty, Inc.

222 A.D.2d 308, 635 N.Y.S.2d 596, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13048

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

DecidedDecember 19, 1995

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 222 A.D.2d 308 (Valdez v. 72 & 82 Terrace Realty, 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

Valdez v. 72 & 82 Terrace Realty, Inc., 222 A.D.2d 308, 635 N.Y.S.2d 596, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13048 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Lowe, III, J.), entered on or about November 3, 1994, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was shot when a number of men appeared at the front door of the apartment he was about to leave and opened fire with what plaintiff described as an Uzi machine gun, injuring plaintiff and killing the other occupants. We agree with the IAS Court that this criminal act was not foreseeable in light of the almost negligible evidence of prior criminal activity (see, e.g., Urena v Hudson Guild, 213 AD2d 312; Ospina v City of New York, 214 AD2d 551) and plaintiff’s failure to adduce any evidence that any such prior activity had been brought to defendant’s attention. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Lowe, III, J.), entered on or about November 3, 1994, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was shot when a number of men appeared at the front door of the apartment he was about to leave and opened fire with what plaintiff described as an Uzi machine gun, injuring plaintiff and killing the other occupants. We agree with the IAS Court that this criminal act was not foreseeable in light of the almost negligible evidence of prior criminal activity (see, e.g., Urena v Hudson Guild, 213 AD2d 312; Ospina v City of New York, 214 AD2d 551) and plaintiff’s failure to adduce any evidence that any such prior activity had been brought to defendant’s attention. Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

222 A.D.2d 308, 635 N.Y.S.2d 596, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13048, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/valdez-v-72-82-terrace-realty-inc-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack