From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Haider v. Rahim

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 26, 2000
273 A.D.2d 442 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)

Opinion

Submitted May 17, 2000.

July 26, 2000.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Barron, J.), dated November 18, 1999, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ahmuty, Demers McManus, Albertson, N.Y. (Frederick B. Simpson and Brendan T. Fitzpatrick of counsel), for appellants.

Benedict P. Morelli Associates, P.C., New York, N.Y. (David S. Ratner and Martha M. McBrayer of counsel), for respondents.

Before: GUY JAMES MANGANO, P.J., FRED T. SANTUCCI, GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, ANITA R. FLORIO, ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

The plaintiffs contend that the infant plaintiff, Neelim Haider, suffered lead poisoning as a result of exposure to lead paint in a two-family house leased from the defendants. In opposition to the defendants' prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment, it was incumbent upon the plaintiffs to lay bare their proof as to the defendants' actual or constructive notice of the lead paint hazard (see, Andrade v. Wong, 251 A.D.2d 609). The plaintiffs failed to discharge this burden.

Although the plaintiffs submitted evidence establishing that the defendant Nasir B. Rahim was aware of peeling and chipping paint within the subject premises, such knowledge does not establish notice that the premises contained lead-based paint (see, Andrade v. Wong, supra).


Summaries of

Haider v. Rahim

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jul 26, 2000
273 A.D.2d 442 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
Case details for

Haider v. Rahim

Case Details

Full title:NEELIM HAIDER, ETC., ET AL., RESPONDENTS, v. NASIR A. RAHIM, ET AL.…

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

Date published: Jul 26, 2000

Citations

273 A.D.2d 442 (N.Y. App. Div. 2000)
711 N.Y.S.2d 751

Citing Cases

Hongach v. City of New York

The defendants established their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law ( see Alvaroz v. Prospect Hosp.,…

Dembitzer v. Chera

However, the Supreme Court erred in denying Michael Safdie's motion for summary judgment dismissing the…