From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sorrentino v. Fireman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 31, 2002
298 A.D.2d 333 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2092

October 31, 2002.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marcy Friedman, J.), entered July 12, 2001, which denied appellants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

FREDRICK A. SCHULMAN, for plaintiffs-respondents.

BRUCE STRIKOWSKY, for defendants-appellants.

Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Saxe, Ellerin, Lerner, Marlow, JJ.


The court properly found the existence of issues of fact sufficient to defeat the summary judgment motion. Plaintiffs allege that while plaintiffs and their decedent were dining at appellants' restaurant, the decedent choked on food, that plaintiffs detrimentally relied on appellants' employees' false assurance that they would make a prompt 911 call, and that a lengthy delay in making the call resulted in the decedent's death.

While no duty is imposed upon a restaurant proprietor or employee to engage in any affirmative action with respect to a choking victim (Public Health Law § 1352-b), appellants' employees undertook affirmative action in calling 911, and conflicting evidence was presented with respect to the time taken to perform this task, whether plaintiffs detrimentally relied upon assurances by appellants' employees, and the extent to which any delay was the proximate cause of the decedent's death (see Heard v. City of New York, 82 N.Y.2d 66, 72; Parvi v. City of Kingston, 41 N.Y.2d 553, 559). We specifically note that the Sprint report provided evidence indicating a significant delay in placing the call.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Sorrentino v. Fireman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Oct 31, 2002
298 A.D.2d 333 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Sorrentino v. Fireman

Case Details

Full title:GEORGE E. SORRENTINO, III, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. SHELDON…

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

Date published: Oct 31, 2002

Citations

298 A.D.2d 333 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
750 N.Y.S.2d 268

Citing Cases

Beadell v. Eros Mgt. Reality

This case is distinguishable from Sorrentino v Fireman (298 A.D.2d 333 [1st Dept 2002]), where plaintiffs…

Beadell v. Eros Mgmt. Reality

An expert cannot speculate, guess, or reach their conclusion by assuming material facts not supported by the…