KARI v. NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY (2014)

KARI R., etc., et al., Plaintiffs–Respondents, v. NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AUTHORITY, Defendant–Appellant.

Decided: November 25, 2014

GONZALEZ, P.J., MAZZARELLI, MANZANET–DANIELS, GISCHE, CLARK, JJ.

Herzfeld & Rubin, P.C., New York (Sharyn Rootenberg of counsel), for appellant. Pollack, Pollack, Isaac & DeCicco, New York (Brian J. Isaac of counsel), for respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Sharon A.M. Aarons, J.), entered March 28, 2014, which, to the extent appealed from, denied defendant's motion to strike what it contended was plaintiffs' new theory of liability and the proffered testimony of plaintiffs' expert at trial, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In this action arising from the infant plaintiff's slip and fall in a puddle of urine that defendant, through its agents, left sitting for days on the landing of the staircase immediately outside plaintiffs' apartment, the motion court correctly determined that plaintiffs' expert testimony was a mere amplification of plaintiffs' consistently pleaded negligence claims, and not a new claim or theory that plaintiffs had failed to specify in their notice of claim (see Portillo v. New York City Tr. Auth., 84 AD3d 535, 536 [1st Dept 2011] ).

We have considered the remaining arguments and find them unavailing.

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Out of date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!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

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.

Explore the Network