From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Keo v. Kimball Brooklands Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 19, 1993
189 A.D.2d 679 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)

Opinion

January 19, 1993

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Anita Florio, J.).


As managing agent of the apartment complex in which plaintiff Vesna Keo was injured in an incinerator explosion, defendant DiConstanzo (defendant) could be subject to liability for nonfeasance only if he were in complete and exclusive control of the management and operation of the building (Jones v. Park Realty, 168 A.D.2d 945 [appeal No. 2], affd for reasons stated 79 N.Y.2d 795; Gardner v. 1111 Corp., 286 App. Div. 110, 112, affd 1 N.Y.2d 758). The evidence submitted by respondent sufficiently demonstrated his lack of such control, thereby shifting the burden to plaintiffs to lay bare their proof to the contrary, a burden plaintiffs failed to meet.

Concur — Sullivan, J.P., Wallach, Kupferman and Kassal, JJ.


Summaries of

Keo v. Kimball Brooklands Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Jan 19, 1993
189 A.D.2d 679 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
Case details for

Keo v. Kimball Brooklands Corp.

Case Details

Full title:VESNA KEO et al., Appellants, v. KIMBALL BROOKLANDS CORP. et al.…

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

Date published: Jan 19, 1993

Citations

189 A.D.2d 679 (N.Y. App. Div. 1993)
592 N.Y.S.2d 373

Citing Cases

Trombetta v. 775 Park Avenue, Inc.

Appellant is not entitled to summary judgment merely because it was no longer the managing agent of the…

Thompson v. Countrywide GP, Inc.

The third exception arises "where the contracting party has entirely displaced the other party's duty to…