From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tra. Auth. v. Edison

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 3, 2007
40 A.D.3d 273 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)

Opinion

No. 984.

May 3, 2007.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert D. Lippmann, J.), entered August 25, 2006, which, in an action arising out of a fire on plaintiffs' premises allegedly caused by defendant-respondent improperly transmitting electrical test currents, granted defendant's motion for summary judgement dismissing the complaint on the ground of plaintiffs' spoliation of the "cable tray," unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Canter Law Firm, P.C., White Plains (Nelson E. Canter of counsel), for appellants.

Richard W. Babinecz, New York (Helman R. Brook of counsel), for respondent.

Before: Friedman, J.P., Marlow, Sullivan, Sweeny and Catterson, JJ.


Defendant adequately demonstrates that the cable tray was necessary to a proper investigation of the cause of the fire, and that the photographs of the fire site it was allowed to take were not an adequate substitute therefor ( see Kirkland v New York City Hous. Auth., 236 AD2d 170, 173). Accordingly, the complaint was properly dismissed as a sanction for plaintiffs having discarded the cable tray before it could be examined by defendant's experts ( see id.).


Summaries of

Tra. Auth. v. Edison

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 3, 2007
40 A.D.3d 273 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
Case details for

Tra. Auth. v. Edison

Case Details

Full title:NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT AUTHORITY et al., Appellants, v. CONSOLIDATED EDISON…

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

Date published: May 3, 2007

Citations

40 A.D.3d 273 (N.Y. App. Div. 2007)
2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 3852
834 N.Y.S.2d 192

Citing Cases

Travers Jewelers Corp. v. 650 Fifth Ave. Corp.

The items remained in Mr. Dickerson's store in New Jersey, where plaintiff had stored them, until they were…

Great N. Ins. Co. v. Estelle Irrigation Corp.

Clearly then, the issue is which parties had the duty to winterize the irrigation system, and the condition…