From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Koraca v. Heritage Hills Condominium Assoc

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 29, 2003
308 A.D.2d 565 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

2002-10641

Argued June 16, 2003.

September 29, 2003.

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant Heritage Maintenance Services, Inc., appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Bellantoni, J.), entered November 13, 2002, as denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against it, and the defendant Heritage Hills Condominium Association #11 cross-appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of the same order as denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against it.

Patrick Colligan (Carol R. Finocchio, New York, N.Y. [Marie R. Hodukavich] of counsel), for appellant-respondent.

Vincent D. McNamara, East Norwich, N.Y. (Michael S. Seltzer of counsel), for respondent-appellant.

La Sorsa Beneventano, White Plains, N.Y. (Kurt Lundgren of counsel), for plaintiffs-respondents.

Before: ANITA R. FLORIO, J.P., ROBERT W. SCHMIDT, STEPHEN G. CRANE, BARRY A. COZIER, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed and cross-appealed from, on the law, with one bill of costs, the motions are granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

In opposition to the showing of the defendants Heritage Hills Condominium Association # 11 and Heritage Maintenance Services, Inc. (hereinafter the defendants) that they neither created the condition complained of, nor had actual or constructive knowledge thereof, the plaintiffs failed to show the existence of a triable issue of fact. The plaintiffs' contention that it was the negligent shoveling by Heritage Maintenance Services, Inc., that created the ice upon which the injured plaintiff fell was based upon sheer speculation and conjecture, and the Supreme Court erred in finding the existence of an issue of fact in this regard. Accordingly, the defendants' motions for summary judgment should have been granted ( see Palka v. Servicemaster Mgt. Servs. Corp., 83 N.Y.2d 579, 589; Carricato v. Jefferson Val. Mall Ltd. Partnership, 299 A.D.2d 444; Voss v. D C Parking, 299 A.D.2d 346; Welles v. New York City Hous. Auth., 284 A.D.2d 327; see also Gordon v. American Museum of Natural History, 67 N.Y.2d 836; see generally Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320).

FLORIO, J.P., SCHMIDT, CRANE and COZIER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Koraca v. Heritage Hills Condominium Assoc

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 29, 2003
308 A.D.2d 565 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Koraca v. Heritage Hills Condominium Assoc

Case Details

Full title:BRUNO KORACA, ET AL., plaintiffs-respondents, v. HERITAGE HILLS…

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

Date published: Sep 29, 2003

Citations

308 A.D.2d 565 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
764 N.Y.S.2d 877