Court of Appeals of New York
Groninger v. Village of Mamroneck, 17 N.Y.3d 125 (2011)
Municipal Liability, Snow and Ice
Facts: Plaintiff sued the Village of Mamaroneck after she slipped and fell on ice in a parking lot owned and maintained by the Village. The defense argued that it never receiver prior written notice nor did it create the condition. The Court of Appeals held that the Village was entitled to notice and an opportunity to correct the defect.
Result: The Court of Appeals affirmed the appellate division which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. (Attorneys – Anna J. Ervolina and Kenneth E. Pitcoff of counsel)
New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department
Shor v. Touch-N-Go Farms, Inc., 933 N.Y.S.2d 686 (2d Dept 2011)
Sexual Assault
Facts: Plaintiff alleged that she was sexually assaulted on the premises of the defendant Touch-N-Go Farms, Inc. while taking equestrian lessons from defendant’s employee. Plaintiff alleged that Touch-N-Go was negligent in hiring, retaining, supervising and investigating their employee. The Court found that the defendant did not have reason to know of their employee’s alleged propensity for the conduct which caused the injury.
Result: The appellate court dismissed the complaint and granted summary judgment for the appellants. (Attorneys – Anna J. Ervolina and Andrea M. Alonso of counsel)
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Riley v. Battery Place Car Park, 210 Fed.Appx. 76 (2nd Cir. 2006).
Slip and Fall
In a suit arising from a slip and fall on a ramp in defendant’s parking garage, the court affirmed an order granting summary judgment in favor of defendants holding that plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether defendants had actual or constructive notice of the offending oil patch.
New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department
Maria T. v. New York Holding Co. Associates, 52 A.D.3d 356 (1st Dept. 2008).
Negligence- Foreseeability
Plaintiff, who was sexually assaulted in her apartment by a man who followed her into her building, sued the building owner and security company for allegedly failing to provide adequate security. In reversing the order appealed from, the appellate court granted summary judgment in favor of defendants since defendants established that the sexual assault was not reasonably predictable, which the court held was needed to establish foreseeability.
New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department
Castillo v. Aubuchon Hardware, 49 A.D.3d 395 (1st Dept.2008).
Products Liability- Defectively Designed Product
Plaintiff claimed to have suffered injuries when she fell from a step ladder she was using in her home. In affirming summary judgment in favor of defendants, the appellate court found that Plaintiff had used the step stool, the product whose design was in question, for several years preceding her fall and was unable to identify anything defective or dangerous about the stool. Furthermore, an expert who examined and performed tests on the stool concluded that damage to the stool was the result and not the cause of Plaintiff’s fall.
New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department
Government Employees Insurance Company v. Young, 39 A.D.3d 751 (2nd Dept. 2007).
Insurance- Automobile Insurance- Underinsured Motorist Endorsement
The appellate court affirmed the granting of GEICO’s petition to permanently stay arbitration of a claim for underinsured motorist benefits. Appellants, who claimed to have suffered injuries when the vehicle they were traveling in was struck in the rear, settled with the insurance company who insured the vehicle that struck their vehicle in the rear for a total sum of $50,000, representing the limits for bodily injury liability under the tortfeasor’s policy. Appellants then made a demand for arbitration under the endorsement for supplementary uninsured/underinsured motorist benefits of a policy issued by GEICO to the owner of the vehicle in which the Appellants were traveling. The appellate court found that the SUM endorsement of the GEICO policy was unambiguous and held that GEICO properly offset the $50,000 Appellants from the tortfeasor’s insurer and that the tortfeasor was not underinsured.
New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department
Guachichulca v. Laszlo N. Tauber & Associates, 37 A.D.3d 760 (2nd Dept. 2007).
Insurance- Exclusions
The appellate court reversed the order appealed from and granted insurance company’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the Complaint. Insurer issued a general liability insurance policy containing an exclusion for bodily injury to an employee of insured if the injury occurred during the course of employment. Insured’s employee was injured during the course of employment and sued the general contractor of the project. The general contractor in turn brought an action against insurer seeking indemnification. The court held that exclusions in coverage were unambiguous and that the plain meaning of the exclusion was to relieve the insurer of liability when an insured was sued or indemnification was requested for damages arising out of bodily injury to an employee sustained in the course of employment.
New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department
Pazmino v Universal Distributors, LLC., 45 A.D.3d 554 (2nd Dept. 2007).
Motor Vehicle, Insurance- No Fault Automobile Insurance, Serious Injury
The appellate court reversed order appealed from and granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground that Plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d). Court held that defendants met their prima facie burden and the plaintiffs could only provide speculative conclusions of an injury since plaintiff had been in "several" other accidents since the doctor last examined him.
New York State Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department
Groom v Village of Sea Cliff, 50 A.D.3d 1094 (2nd Dept.2008).
Negligence- Duty of Landowner
Municipal defendants were not liable for injuries sustained by a child who climbed onto a moss-covered jetty at the beach and fell. The appellate court held that the slippery condition of the jetty was open and obvious and inherent or incidental to the nature of the property and could be reasonably anticipated by those using it.