From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tracey v. Lord Baltimore Cap. C

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 7, 2002
298 A.D.2d 383 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion


298 A.D.2d 383 751 N.Y.S.2d 244 Robert Tracey, Appellant, v. Lord Baltimore Capital Corporation, Respondent. Supreme Court of New York, Second Department October 7, 2002.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (O'Rourke, J.), entered September 13, 2001, which granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, denied his cross motion to strike the defendant's second and third affirmative defenses on the ground that they are academic, and, sua sponte, imposed costs and an attorney's fee against his attorney pursuant to CPLR 8303-a.

OPINION

Ordered that the appeal from so much of the order as, sua sponte, imposed costs and an attorney's fee against the plaintiff's attorney is dismissed, as the plaintiff is not aggrieved by that portion of the order (see CPLR 5511); and it is further,

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as reviewed; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the defendant.

After consuming a significant quantity of alcohol prior to and while trespassing at night with several friends on the defendant's property, the 18-year-old plaintiff sustained injuries when he ignored warning signs, defeated a locked ladder guard, climbed to the roof of the defendant's warehouse, and fell through a readily observable skylight (see Laluna v DGM Partners, 234 A.D.2d 519). Contrary to his contentions, the accident was solely the result of the plaintiff's misuse of the skylight, which was an extraordinary occurrence against which the defendant was not obligated to guard (see Clifford v Sachem Cent. School Dist. at Holbrook, 271 A.D.2d 470; Kurshals v Connetquot Cent. School Dist., 227 A.D.2d 593, 594). Consequently, the Supreme Court correctly granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment. The plaintiff's remaining contentions are without merit.

S. Miller, J.P., Crane, Cozier and Rivera, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Tracey v. Lord Baltimore Cap. C

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 7, 2002
298 A.D.2d 383 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Tracey v. Lord Baltimore Cap. C

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT TRACEY, appellant, v. LORD BALTIMORE CAPITAL CORPORATION, ETC.…

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

Date published: Oct 7, 2002

Citations

298 A.D.2d 383 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
751 N.Y.S.2d 383
751 N.Y.S.2d 244

Citing Cases

Vargas v. Lamberti

Additionally, the defendants failed to establish that the type of occurrence that brought about the…

Desroches v. Heritage Builders Grp.

Precedent militates against imposing a duty of care on a property owner in like circumstances. Elwood v Alpha…