From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

North Star Contracting v. Burton F. Clark

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 3, 1995
214 A.D.2d 550 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)

Opinion

April 3, 1995

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Nicolai, J.).


Ordered that the appeal from the judgment is dismissed as the judgment was superseded by the order entered July 14, 1993, made upon reargument; and it is further,

Ordered that the order entered July 14, 1993, is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,

Ordered that the respondent is awarded one bill of costs.

We agree with the Supreme Court that the defendant is entitled to judgment, as a matter of law dismissing the complaint. The doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is not applicable here. There is no definitive evidence as to the cause of the fire that damaged the plaintiff's property (see, Schultheis v Pristouris, 45 A.D.2d 864; Board of Educ. v Herb's Dodge Sales Serv., 79 A.D.2d 1049; Atlas Supply Co. v Colgate Contr., 8 A.D.2d 793). Moreover, our conclusion remains the same even considering the memorandum prepared by two employees of the plaintiff, Pete Nowicki, Jr., and Charles Maneri, Sr., which was relied upon by the plaintiff but apparently disregarded by the Supreme Court. Mangano, P.J., Rosenblatt, Miller and Ritter, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

North Star Contracting v. Burton F. Clark

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Apr 3, 1995
214 A.D.2d 550 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
Case details for

North Star Contracting v. Burton F. Clark

Case Details

Full title:NORTH STAR CONTRACTING CORP., Appellant, v. BURTON F. CLARK, INC.…

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

Date published: Apr 3, 1995

Citations

214 A.D.2d 550 (N.Y. App. Div. 1995)
625 N.Y.S.2d 918

Citing Cases

Wesco Ins. Co. v. Moncrieffe

Where a fire's cause cannot be determined, res ipsa loquitur is inapplicable. See N. Star Contr. Corp, v…

Travelers Property Casualty v. Gomez Supermarket

2d 669, 670) Although plaintiff was not required to exclude all "possible proximate causes of an accident" (…