WILK v. Ace Concrete & Asphalt Co., Inc., Defendant-Respondent. (1998)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Elizabeth WILK, et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. Joel COHEN, Defendant-Appellant, The City of New York, et al., Defendants, Ace Concrete & Asphalt Co., Inc., Defendant-Respondent.

Decided: October 06, 1998

Before ROSENBERGER, J.P., ELLERIN, WALLACH and WILLIAMS, JJ.

Howard A. Suckle, for Plaintiffs-Respondents. Marshall D. Sweetbaum, for Defendant-Appellant. Frank J. Lombardo, for Defendant-Respondent.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Phyllis Gangel-Jacob, J.), entered September 16, 1997, which, in a action to recover for personal injuries allegedly sustained as a result of a defective sidewalk, insofar as appealed from, denied defendant abutting property owner's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The parties' experts' affidavits raise issues of fact as to whether the allegedly defective sidewalk installed on defendant property owner's behalf was a proximate cause of plaintiff's injury (cf., Ellis v. County of Albany, 205 A.D.2d 1005, 613 N.Y.S.2d 983). There is no merit to appellant's argument that he cannot be held vicariously liable for defects in the sidewalk created by a sidewalk contractor he hired in connection with renovations to the exterior of his building (Mendoza v. City of New York, 205 A.D.2d 741, 613 N.Y.S.2d 695).

MEMORANDUM DECISION.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law