From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Medina v. New York Elevator Co., Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 11, 1998
250 A.D.2d 656 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

May 11, 1998

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


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

We agree with the Supreme Court that a resolution of the issue of the respondent's duty to indemnify the appellant must await a determination as to whether the plaintiff's injuries were caused by any negligence on the part of the respondent ( see, Bermudez v. New York City Hous. Auth., 199 A.D.2d 356; Cichon v. Brista Estates Assocs., 193 A.D.2d 926, 927-928; Hayes v. Crane Hogan Structural Sys., 191 A.D.2d 978, 979).

The appellant's remaining contentions are unpreserved for appellate review.

Mangano, P. J., Rosenblatt, Joy and Krausman, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Medina v. New York Elevator Co., Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
May 11, 1998
250 A.D.2d 656 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Medina v. New York Elevator Co., Inc.

Case Details

Full title:MARTHA MEDINA, Plaintiff, v. NEW YORK ELEVATOR Co., INC., Respondent, and…

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

Date published: May 11, 1998

Citations

250 A.D.2d 656 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
671 N.Y.S.2d 691

Citing Cases

Ramirez v. Rotavele Elevator, Inc.

Lastly, 447-453's motion for judgment against Rotavele for contractual and common law indemnification is…

Mastrobattista v. Borges

These motions are premature until there is a determination as to whether plaintiffs' alleged injuries were…