From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Santo v. Astor Court Owners Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 19, 1998
248 A.D.2d 267 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

March 19, 1998

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bertram Katz, J.).


The motion court erred in finding that plaintiffs' expert's affidavit raised triable issues of fact. His opinion, that plaintiff's slip and fall was the result of defendants' negligence in applying wax to their building's floor with a buffing machine, was based, allegedly, on a review of the record and a visit to the accident site, the latter occurring apparently seven years after the accident. However, the only evidence asserted in this regard was the building superintendent's uncontroverted testimony that the buffing machine was not used to apply wax. To the extent that the expert's opinion may have been based on the belated site visit, it should be disregarded as conclusory ( see, Duffy v. Universal Maintenance Corp., 227 A.D.2d 238; Drillings v. Beth Israel Med. Ctr., 200 A.D.2d 381).

Concur — Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Williams and Tom, JJ.


Summaries of

Santo v. Astor Court Owners Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 19, 1998
248 A.D.2d 267 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Santo v. Astor Court Owners Corporation

Case Details

Full title:JUAN SANTO et al., Respondents, v. ASTOR COURT OWNERS CORPORATION et al.…

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

Date published: Mar 19, 1998

Citations

248 A.D.2d 267 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
668 N.Y.S.2d 890

Citing Cases

McGarvey v. Bank of N.Y

Moreover, since the defendant's own property manager testified at his deposition that the revolving door must…

Majchrzak v. Harry's Harbour Place Grille

Defendants also met their burden of establishing their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law to the…