From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ospina v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 3, 1995
214 A.D.2d 551 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

April 3, 1995

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


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The plaintiff Nubia Ospina seeks to recover damages for personal injuries arising out of a sexual assault committed on premises owned and managed by the respondents. Her husband, the plaintiff Jose Ospina, seeks derivative damages for loss of services. At the time of the assault, the injured plaintiff, a home care attendant, was on her way to visit a client. She was assaulted in a passageway leading to the courtyard entrance to the apartment building where her client resided.

The Supreme Court granted the respondents' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against them. We affirm.

At her deposition, the injured plaintiff recalled being told about one prior assault in the respondents' housing complex. However, the injured plaintiff did not know when this prior assault occurred and was unsure about its underlying circumstances. The injured plaintiff also stated that she saw people "hanging out" in the area where she was assaulted and that she had been told that "there were * * * drug addicts who hang around there".

The injured plaintiff's vague recollection of a single criminal act at some unspecified time prior to the assault upon her, even when coupled with her other statements, was patently insufficient to raise a triable question of fact as to whether the respondents had such notice of prior criminal activity so as to make the assault upon her foreseeable (see, Rozhik v 1600 Ocean Parkway Assocs., 208 A.D.2d 913; see also, Jacqueline S. v City of New York, 81 N.Y.2d 288; Nallan v Helmsley-Spear, Inc., 50 N.Y.2d 507).

Additionally, the injured plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue as to whether the respondents breached any duty of care owed to her and whether any of the respondents' acts were a proximate cause of the assault (see, Mkrtchyan v 61st Woodside Assocs., 209 A.D.2d 490; Surini v Adamowicz, 200 A.D.2d 737; see also, Waters v New York City Hous. Auth., 69 N.Y.2d 225; Nallan v Helmsley-Spear, Inc., supra). Bracken, J.P., Thompson, Hart and Goldstein, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Ospina v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 3, 1995
214 A.D.2d 551 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

Ospina v. City of New York

Case Details

Full title:NUBIA OSPINA et al., Appellants, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Defendant, and…

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

Date published: Apr 3, 1995

Citations

214 A.D.2d 551 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
625 N.Y.S.2d 76

Citing Cases

Vasquez v. RVA Garage, Inc.

In addition, there is no indication that the illegal use of the premises was ever reported to Campagna or the…

Varghese v. Singh [2d Dept 1999

The defendants' motion for summary judgment was properly granted. The evidence in the record does not support…