From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Farmer v. Central Elevator, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 2, 1998
255 A.D.2d 289 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

November 2, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Queens County (Posner, J.).


Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

The plaintiff commenced this action against the defendant to recover damages for personal injuries she allegedly sustained when she tripped and fell while exiting a misleveled elevator at the nursing home where she worked.

"An elevator company which agrees to maintain an elevator in safe operating condition may be liable to a passenger for failure to correct conditions of which it has knowledge or failure to use reasonable care to discover and correct a condition which it ought to have found" (Rogers v. Dorchester Assocs., 32 N.Y.2d 553, 559). The defendant made a prima facie showing that it did not have actual or constructive notice of the allegedly defective condition (see, Tashjian v. Strong Assocs., 225 A.D.2d 907; Morales v. Hefran Realty Co., 202 A.D.2d 407). The defendant's repair records for the subject elevator did not reveal any previous misleveling problem. The plaintiff testified at her deposition that she rode the elevator at the facility several times every workday prior to the accident and never noticed that it misleveled.

In opposition to the motion, the plaintiff submitted an affidavit by her supervisor, in which she stated that she knew that "from time to time * * * the elevators were broken" and that there were "intermittent problems". This was insufficient to create a triable issue of fact.

The plaintiff's argument based on the theory of res ipsa loquitur is unpreserved for appellate review. Proof might have been offered by the defendant to refute that theory had it been presented to the Supreme Court in the first instance (see, Pellicane v. Lambda Chi Alpha Fraternity, 228 A.D.2d 569; Fresh Pond Rd. Assocs. v. Estate of Schacht, 120 A.D.2d 561). Accordingly, the defendant's motion for summary judgment must be granted.

Rosenblatt, J. P., O'Brien, Sullivan, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Farmer v. Central Elevator, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 2, 1998
255 A.D.2d 289 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Farmer v. Central Elevator, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:ELEANOR FARMER, Respondent, v. CENTRAL ELEVATOR, INC., Appellant

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Nov 2, 1998

Citations

255 A.D.2d 289 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
679 N.Y.S.2d 636

Citing Cases

Lasser v. Grumman

The plaintiff allegedly was injured when a freight elevator door closed on him. The defendants Dover Elevator…

Kim v. Park Hill Owners, Inc.

"An elevator company which agrees to maintain an elevator in safe operating condition may be liable to a…