Opinion
9462N Index 24776/15
05-28-2019
Leigh BETANCOURT, Plaintiff–Appellant, v. The CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., Defendants–Respondents.
Hach & Rose, LLP, New York (Michael A. Rose of counsel), for appellant. Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Yasmin Zainulbhai of counsel), for respondent.
Hach & Rose, LLP, New York (Michael A. Rose of counsel), for appellant.
Zachary W. Carter, Corporation Counsel, New York (Yasmin Zainulbhai of counsel), for respondent.
Sweeny, J.P., Richter, Kapnick, Oing, Singh JJ.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Mitchell J. Danziger, J.), entered on or about December 22, 2017, which denied plaintiff's motion to consolidate two personal injury actions, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The court providently exercised its discretion in denying the motion to consolidate the two actions, as there are insufficient common questions of law and fact (see J. Henry Schroder Bank & Trust Co. v. South Ferry Bldg. Co. , 88 A.D.2d 570, 571, 451 N.Y.S.2d 86 [1st Dept. 1982] ; CPLR 602[a] ). The 2015 action arises from an assault by a student and is based in negligence, while the 2017 action arises out of an accident with an alleged defective door and is a premises liability case. While both actions involve the same plaintiff and defendants, the underlying facts and standards of liability are different. Furthermore, there is no danger of defendants in one case blaming the defendants in the other case for plaintiff's exacerbated injuries (compare Gage v. Travel Time & Tide , 161 A.D.2d 276, 554 N.Y.S.2d 910 [1st Dept. 1990] ).
We have considered plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them unavailing.