From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gedney v. Atcosta

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 15, 2004
5 A.D.3d 542 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

2003-02528.

Decided March 15, 2004.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Baisley, J.), dated January 31, 2003, which denied her motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Robert P. Tusa, Hauppauge, N.Y. (Marcia M. Brin of counsel), for appellant.

Caiati, Garguilo Green, Bellport, N.Y. (J. Lee Snead of counsel), for respondent.

Before: ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P., ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, WILLIAM F. MASTRO, REINALDO E. RIVERA, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

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

The plaintiff allegedly was injured when a hot water heater, servicing the apartment he rented from the defendant, exploded. The defendant established her entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that she neither created nor had actual or constructive knowledge of the allegedly dangerous condition that caused the plaintiff's injuries ( see Gordon v. American Museum of Natural History, 67 N.Y.2d 836; Clarke v. Brooklyn Union Gas Co., 297 A.D.2d 779). In response, the plaintiff, who relied on a report from an expert that lacked any probative value ( see Leggio v. Gearhart, 294 A.D.2d 543; Avella v. Jack LaLanne Fitness Ctrs., 272 A.D.2d 423; Levitt v. County of Suffolk, 145 A.D.2d 414), failed to raise a triable issue of fact ( see Clarke v. Brooklyn Union Gas Co., supra at 779; Mittendorf v. Brooklyn Union Gas Co., 195 A.D.2d 449). Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

FLORIO, J.P., SCHMIDT, MASTRO and RIVERA, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Gedney v. Atcosta

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 15, 2004
5 A.D.3d 542 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

Gedney v. Atcosta

Case Details

Full title:GEORGE G. GEDNEY, respondent, v. RUTH LEE ATCOSTA, appellant

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

Date published: Mar 15, 2004

Citations

5 A.D.3d 542 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
772 N.Y.S.2d 873

Citing Cases

Sewkarran v. Debellis

The defendants' established their prima facie entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the first cause of…

Lewis v. City of New York

They urge the court to deny Con Ed's request or, in the alternative, to permit them to submit additional…