From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gjeloshaj v. 2979 LLC

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 26, 2011
83 A.D.3d 583 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)

Opinion

No. 4885.

April 26, 2011.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Geoffrey D. Wright, J.), entered on or about June 4, 2010, which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered September 7, 2010, which, upon reargument, adhered to its original determination, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as academic.

Kelner and Kelner, New York (Gail S. Kelner of counsel), for appellant.

Mound Cotton Wollan Greengrass, New York (Steven A. Torrini of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Renwick, DeGrasse, Freedman and Richter, JJ.


Plaintiff alleges she was injured when an exterior stair at the subject premises broke as she stepped onto it. The record shows that the superintendent of the building, who happened to be plaintiffs son, had repaired the stair a few months prior to her fall.

Since defendant, plaintiffs son's employer, failed to satisfy its initial burden to establish, as a matter of law, that it did not cause or create the alleged defect, the motion court should have denied defendant's motion for summary judgment ( see Zisa v City of New York, 39 AD3d 313; Cuevas v City of New York, 32 AD3d 372, 373; see also Serano v New York City Hous. Auth., 66 AD3d 867).


Summaries of

Gjeloshaj v. 2979 LLC

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 26, 2011
83 A.D.3d 583 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
Case details for

Gjeloshaj v. 2979 LLC

Case Details

Full title:KATRINE GJELOSHAJ, Appellant, v. 2979 LLC, Respondent

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

Date published: Apr 26, 2011

Citations

83 A.D.3d 583 (N.Y. App. Div. 2011)
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 3286
922 N.Y.S.2d 318

Citing Cases

Sorgen v. MTA Metro N. R.R.

To the extent that Midtown argues, in reply, that "[u]nder New York law, the Plaintiff and not the Defendants…

Rosa v. Columbus Parkway Assocs.

Phrased another way, it is not, in this context, a plaintiff's initial obligation to prove that the City did…