From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Warner v. Einsidler

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 25, 2004
5 A.D.3d 298 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

2743.

Decided March 25, 2004.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Diane Lebedeff, J.), entered November 29, 2002, which granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Christopher J. Crawford, for Plaintiff-Appellants.

Steven L. Sonkin, for Defendants-Respondents.

Before: Tom, J.P., Andrias, Lerner, Friedman, Marlow, JJ.


While putting on a shirt in defendants' house, plaintiff was injured when his hand came into contact with the blade of an operating ceiling fan. Plaintiff admitted that he had been aware of the presence of the ceiling fan immediately before he was injured. There was no evidence of any defect in the fan or its installation, nor was there any evidence of any building code violation. On this record, the fan did not pose a reasonably foreseeable hazard, and defendants were therefore entitled to summary judgment ( see Jones v. Presbyterian Hosp., ___ A.D.3d ___, 771 N.Y.S.2d 109; Goldban v. 56th Realty, 304 A.D.2d 408; Pinero v. Rite Aid of New York, 294 A.D.2d 251, 253, affd 99 N.Y.2d 541; Pepic v. Joco Realty, 216 A.D.2d 95, 96).

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


Summaries of

Warner v. Einsidler

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 25, 2004
5 A.D.3d 298 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

Warner v. Einsidler

Case Details

Full title:JONATHAN WARNER, ET AL., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. MICHAEL EINSIDLER, ET…

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

Date published: Mar 25, 2004

Citations

5 A.D.3d 298 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
774 N.Y.S.2d 129

Citing Cases

Prado v. City of New York

In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Thus, summary judgment dismissing the…