Williams v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Williams v. New York City Housing Authority

56 A.D.2d 361, 867 N.Y.S.2d 442

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

DecidedNovember 20, 2008

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 56 A.D.2d 361 (Williams v. New York City Housing Authority) 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

Williams v. New York City Housing Authority, 56 A.D.2d 361, 867 N.Y.S.2d 442 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2008).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Judith J. Gische, J.), entered September 7, 2007, which granted defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was shot while she was talking to a friend on the grounds of the housing complex where she lived. Dismissal of the complaint was appropriate where, under the circumstances presented, defendant had no opportunity to control the conduct of the perpetrators (see Hairston v New York City Hous. Auth., 238 AD2d 474 [1997], lv denied 91 NY2d 802 [1997]). Furthermore, inasmuch as the shooting occurred in the outdoor common area of the housing complex, defendant did not owe a duty to protect plaintiff (see Daly v City of New York, 227 AD2d 432 [1996], lv denied 89 NY2d 803 [1996]; Concepcion v New York City Hous. Auth., 207 AD2d 857 [1994]).

We have considered plaintiffs remaining arguments, including that the poor lighting conditions in the area where she was shot was the proximate cause of her injuries, and find them unavailing. Concur — Tom, J.P., Saxe, Sweeny, Catterson and DeGrasse, JJ.

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

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Judith J. Gische, J.), entered September 7, 2007, which granted defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was shot while she was talking to a friend on the grounds of the housing complex where she lived. Dismissal of the complaint was appropriate where, under the circumstances presented, defendant had no opportunity to control the conduct of the perpetrators (see Hairston v New York City Hous. Auth., 238 AD2d 474 [1997], lv denied 91 NY2d 802 [1997]). Furthermore, inasmuch as the shooting occurred in the outdoor common area of the housing complex, defendant did not owe a duty to protect plaintiff (see Daly v City of New York, 227 AD2d 432 [1996], lv denied 89 NY2d 803 [1996]; Concepcion v New York City Hous. Auth., 207 AD2d 857 [1994]).

We have considered plaintiffs remaining arguments, including that the poor lighting conditions in the area where she was shot was the proximate cause of her injuries, and find them unavailing. Concur — Tom, J.P., Saxe, Sweeny, Catterson and DeGrasse, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

56 A.D.2d 361, 867 N.Y.S.2d 442, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-new-york-city-housing-authority-nyappdiv-2008.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack