Yanas v. Chester Investigational Agency, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Yanas v. Chester Investigational Agency, Inc.

230 A.D.2d 845, 646 N.Y.S.2d 632, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8731

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 19, 1996·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff [846] appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Levitt, J.), dated November 15, 1995, which granted the respective motions of the defendants for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs payable to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The plaintiff was struck in the head from behind by an unknown assailant while near the building in which he lived. At the time, depending on which of the plaintiff’s assertions are credited, he was either on a private sidewalk leading to the entrance to his building or on a public sidewalk immediately adjacent thereto. Each of the defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

On the facts presented, the plaintiff has failed to raise a triable issue of fact that would support any finding of liability against the defendants (see, Daly v City of New York, 227 AD2d 432; Concepcion v New York City Hous. Auth., 207 AD2d 857; Levya v Riverbay Corp., 206 AD2d 150; Allen v New York City Hous. Auth., 203 AD2d 313). Accordingly, the complaint was properly dismissed.

Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff [846] appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Levitt, J.), dated November 15, 1995, which granted the respective motions of the defendants for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with one bill of costs payable to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The plaintiff was struck in the head from behind by an unknown assailant while near the building in which he lived. At the time, depending on which of the plaintiff’s assertions are credited, he was either on a private sidewalk leading to the entrance to his building or on a public sidewalk immediately adjacent thereto. Each of the defendants moved for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

On the facts presented, the plaintiff has failed to raise a triable issue of fact that would support any finding of liability against the defendants (see, Daly v City of New York, 227 AD2d 432; Concepcion v New York City Hous. Auth., 207 AD2d 857; Levya v Riverbay Corp., 206 AD2d 150; Allen v New York City Hous. Auth., 203 AD2d 313). Accordingly, the complaint was properly dismissed.

Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Pizzuto and Altman, JJ., concur.

Yanas v. Chester Investigational Agency, Inc., 230 A.D.2d 845, 646 N.Y.S.2d 632, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8731 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

230 A.D.2d 845 (Yanas v. Chester Investigational Agency, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related