Zarem v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Zarem v. City of New York

6 A.D.3d 276, 774 N.Y.S.2d 695, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4634

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

DecidedApril 20, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 6 A.D.3d 276 (Zarem v. City of New York) 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

Zarem v. City of New York, 6 A.D.3d 276, 774 N.Y.S.2d 695, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4634 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert D. Lippmann, J.), entered July 31, 2003, which, to the extent appealed from, granted defendant Infinity Outdoor summary judgment on its cross claims against defendant Shelter Express for contractual indemnification and breach of contract, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was allegedly injured when, on a snowy night, he tripped on a sidewalk defect adjacent to a bus shelter and slipped on some ice. The area was maintained by Shelter Express pursuant to a contract whereby it agreed to indemnify Infinity Outdoor for liability arising from the former’s performance of its work under the agreement, “whether by negligence or otherwise.” While questions of fact exist as to whether Shelter Express was negligent and whether any such negligence caused plaintiffs injury, Infinity Outdoor was entitled to contractual indemnification in the absence of evidence that plaintiffs accident was attributable to negligence on Infinity’s part (see Brown v Two Exch. Plaza Partners, 76 NY2d 172 [1990]; Masciotta v Morse Diesel Intl., 303 AD2d 309 [2003]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Saxe, Williams, Friedman and Marlow, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert D. Lippmann, J.), entered July 31, 2003, which, to the extent appealed from, granted defendant Infinity Outdoor summary judgment on its cross claims against defendant Shelter Express for contractual indemnification and breach of contract, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was allegedly injured when, on a snowy night, he tripped on a sidewalk defect adjacent to a bus shelter and slipped on some ice. The area was maintained by Shelter Express pursuant to a contract whereby it agreed to indemnify Infinity Outdoor for liability arising from the former’s performance of its work under the agreement, “whether by negligence or otherwise.” While questions of fact exist as to whether Shelter Express was negligent and whether any such negligence caused plaintiffs injury, Infinity Outdoor was entitled to contractual indemnification in the absence of evidence that plaintiffs accident was attributable to negligence on Infinity’s part (see Brown v Two Exch. Plaza Partners, 76 NY2d 172 [1990]; Masciotta v Morse Diesel Intl., 303 AD2d 309 [2003]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Saxe, Williams, Friedman and Marlow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 A.D.3d 276, 774 N.Y.S.2d 695, 2004 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4634, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zarem-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack