Opinion
2012-02-2
Luis RUIZ, Jr., Plaintiff–Respondent, v. RHQ ASSOCIATES, LLC, et al., Defendants–Appellants,Melvin McClain, et al., Defendants.
Smith Mazure Director Wilkins Young & Yagerman, P.C., New York (Marcia K. Raicus of counsel), for appellants. Peña & Kahn PLLC, Bronx (Diane W. Bando of counsel), for respondent.
Smith Mazure Director Wilkins Young & Yagerman, P.C., New York (Marcia K. Raicus of counsel), for appellants. Peña & Kahn PLLC, Bronx (Diane W. Bando of counsel), for respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lucindo Suarez, J.), entered January 7, 2011, which partially denied defendants RHQ Associates, LLC and Jerome Associates LLC's (defendants) motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
In seeking summary judgment to dismiss the complaint, defendants failed to address plaintiff's claims alleging vicarious liability for negligent entrustment and negligent maintenance of the premises. Their arguments in their reply papers were insufficient to cure the deficiency *588 ( see Dannasch v. Bifulco, 184 A.D.2d 415, 416–417, 585 N.Y.S.2d 360 [1992] ). In any event, triable issues of fact exist as to whether the employee of defendants negligently entrusted the guns he found on the premises to his teenage son, and if so, whether defendants could be held vicariously liable for the employee's act ( see Ramos v. Jake Realty Co., 21 A.D.3d 744, 801 N.Y.S.2d 566 [2005]; Burns v. City of New York, 6 A.D.2d 30, 174 N.Y.S.2d 192 [1958] ). There is also a triable issue of fact as to whether defendants negligently permitted the hazardous condition to exist on the premises through the employee's acts ( see Boderick v. R.Y. Mgt. Co., Inc., 71 A.D.3d 144, 897 N.Y.S.2d 1 [2009] ).
Plaintiff's request for sanctions is denied.