Opinion
January 16, 1997.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Charles Ramos, J.), entered April 24, 1996, which, in a products liability action, insofar as appealed from, denied the motion of defendants-appellants manufacturer and seller for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Before: Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Nardelli, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.
We agree with the IAS Court there is sufficient circumstantial evidence to raise an issue of fact as to whether the accident-causing, lost paint gun supplied to plaintiff by the contractor was manufactured and sold by appellants ( see, Healey v Firestone Tire Rubber Co., 87 NY2d 596, 601-602, citing, inter alia, Taylor v General Battery Corp., 183 AD2d 990), and whether the accident was due to a product defect ( see, McDermott v City of New York, 50 NY2d 211, 220-221; Mitchell v Maguire Co., 151 AD2d 355). Defendants have failed to establish either of those facts to warrant summary judgment in their favor.