Opinion
890 CA 20-01483
11-19-2021
MICHELLE H., Individually, and as Parent and Natural Guardian of AJ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BUFFALO EDGE, LLC, BNYP Properties, LLC, BNYP Maintenance, LLC, BNYP, LLC, Defendants-Respondents, Key Property Consulting, Inc., et al., Defendants.
FEROLETO LAW, BUFFALO (JOHN FEROLETO OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT. WALSH, ROBERTS & GRACE, BUFFALO (JOSEPH H. EMMINGER, JR., OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT BUFFALO EDGE, LLC. BOUVIER LAW, LLP, BUFFALO (NORMAN E.S. GREENE OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT BNYP PROPERTIES, LLC. TREVETT CRISTO P.C., ROCHESTER (ERIC M. DOLAN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS BNYP, LLC AND BNYP MAINTENANCE, LLC.
FEROLETO LAW, BUFFALO (JOHN FEROLETO OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT.
WALSH, ROBERTS & GRACE, BUFFALO (JOSEPH H. EMMINGER, JR., OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT BUFFALO EDGE, LLC.
BOUVIER LAW, LLP, BUFFALO (NORMAN E.S. GREENE OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT BNYP PROPERTIES, LLC.
TREVETT CRISTO P.C., ROCHESTER (ERIC M. DOLAN OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS BNYP, LLC AND BNYP MAINTENANCE, LLC.
PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., CENTRA, NEMOYER, TROUTMAN, AND WINSLOW, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously modified on the law by denying the motions of defendants Buffalo Edge, LLC and BNYP Properties, LLC and the cross motion of defendants BNYP Maintenance, LLC and BNYP, LLC and reinstating the complaint and cross claims against those defendants, and as modified the order is affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: In this negligence action, plaintiff appeals from an order that denied her cross motion for partial summary judgment and that granted the respective motions and cross motion of Buffalo Edge, LLC, BNYP Properties, LLC, BNYP Maintenance, LLC, and BNYP, LLC (collectively, defendants) for summary judgment dismissing, inter alia, the complaint against them. Contrary to plaintiff's contention, her cross motion was properly denied (see generally Beatty v. Williams , 227 A.D.2d 912, 912, 643 N.Y.S.2d 267 [4th Dept. 1996] ). We agree with plaintiff, however, that defendants failed to meet their initial burdens on their respective motions and cross motion insofar as they sought summary judgment dismissing the complaint against them (see generally Zuckerman v. City of New York , 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562, 427 N.Y.S.2d 595, 404 N.E.2d 718 [1980] ). Contrary to Supreme Court's determination, "[i]t is well established that a party cannot obtain summary judgment ‘by pointing to gaps in its opponent's proof’ " ( Frank v. Price Chopper Operating Co. , 275 A.D.2d 940, 941, 713 N.Y.S.2d 614 [4th Dept. 2000] ). We therefore modify the order accordingly. The indemnification-related arguments by Buffalo Edge, LLC are not properly before us (see Armental v. 401 Park Ave. S. Assoc., LLC , 182 A.D.3d 405, 408, 121 N.Y.S.3d 259 [1st Dept. 2020] ) and should be addressed in the first instance by the motion court.