Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Miguel Menard, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Highbridge House, Inc., et al., Defendants-Respondents.
_
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Betty Owen Stinson, J.), entered on or about July 24, 2009, which granted defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff firefighter was injured in a common stairwell between two floors after a tenant, descending in a panic because of the smoke filling the hallway on the floor above, collided with him and he fell. He alleges, pursuant to General Municipal Law § 205-a, that his injuries resulted from defendants' violations of Administrative Code of City of N.Y. §§ 27-127 and 27-128 (renumbered § 28-301.1 by Local Law No. 33 [2007] § 11, eff July 1, 2008). These provisions require building owners to maintain their premises in a safe condition. Plaintiff claims that the storage of combustible clothing on the exterior balcony of an apartment violated these provisions, that the clothing caught fire, encouraged the spread of the fire, and created the heavy smoke conditions that prompted the tenant to flee down the stairs, knocking him down as she tried to pass him.
The record demonstrates that any such alleged violation “did not directly or indirectly cause plaintiff's injuries” (see Giuffrida v. Citibank Corp., 100 N.Y.2d 72, 82 [2003] ), but that they were caused by the collision with a panicked tenant heedlessly fleeing the scene of a likely fire. This is among the risks ordinarily encountered by firefighters (see generally Mullen v. Zoebe, Inc., 86 N.Y.2d 135, 142 [1995] ).
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
_
CLERK
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Docket No: 4518
Decided: March 15, 2011
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)