Wright v. Feinblum

220 A.D.2d 660, 633 N.Y.S.2d 317, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10682
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 23, 1995
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 220 A.D.2d 660 (Wright v. Feinblum) 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
Wright v. Feinblum, 220 A.D.2d 660, 633 N.Y.S.2d 317, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10682 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Vaccaro, J.), dated June 29, 1994, which granted the motion of the defendants William Feinblum, Nathan Ofgang, Mildred Rudolph, Rubin Pikus, Sharon Pikus, Gary Kahn, and Pearl Shub, all d/b/a 320 Eastern Parkway Company, for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against them.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The law is well settled that an out-of-possession landlord is not liable for injuries that occur on the premises where the lessor neither retains control over the premises nor is contractually obligated to remedy unsafe conditions (see, Suarez v Skate-land Presents Laces, 187 AD2d 500; La Fleur v Power Test Realty Co., 159 AD2d 691). Accordingly, since the landlord in this case did not retain control and the duty of maintaining the area where the accident occurred was placed upon the tenant by the express terms of the lease, the Supreme Court properly granted the motion for summary judgment.

[661]*661The plaintiff's remaining contention is improperly raised for the first time on appeal (see, Orellano v Samples Tire Equip. & Supply Corp., 110 AD2d 757) and, in any event, is patently without merit (see, La Fleur v Power Test Realty Co., supra; Silver v Brodsky, 112 AD2d 213). Sullivan, J. P., Thompson, Copertino, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Habinowski v. Chin
24 A.D.3d 608 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Dorman v. 19-20 Indus. City Assocs., Inc.
2004 NY Slip Op 50754(U) (New York Supreme Court, Kings County, 2004)
White v. Jeffco Western Properties, Inc.
304 A.D.2d 824 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Quito v. Guarino
287 A.D.2d 554 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Reidy v. Burger King Corp.
250 A.D.2d 747 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Garcia v. Home Center, Inc.
240 A.D.2d 629 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Vasquez v. RVA Garage, Inc.
238 A.D.2d 407 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Maldonado v. Matera
237 A.D.2d 584 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Boyles v. Petrucelli
921 F. Supp. 1200 (S.D. New York, 1996)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
220 A.D.2d 660, 633 N.Y.S.2d 317, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10682, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wright-v-feinblum-nyappdiv-1995.