MEGAN v. Schindler Elevator Corporation, Defendant–Respondent–Appellant. (2018)

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shlomo Hagler, J.), entered January 30, 2017, which denied plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability as against defendant Schindler Elevator Corporation (Schindler), and denied Schindler's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff Thomas Megan was injured when he suffered an electrical shock as he attempted to lock an ash lift's control box.  He established his prima facie entitlement to partial summary judgment on the issue of liability in this action by submitting evidence that defendant Schindler's elevator technician had replaced the twist lock receptacle in the control box just prior to the accident and had failed to properly ground the control box when he made the repair(see e.g. Schneider v. Kings Hwy. Hosp. Ctr., 67 N.Y.2d 743, 744, 500 N.Y.S.2d 95, 490 N.E.2d 1221 [1986] ).

In opposition, Schindler raised a triable issue of fact based on the deposition testimony of the elevator technician that he never performed any work on the control box at any time (see Josephson v. Crane Club, 264 A.D.2d 359, 694 N.Y.S.2d 376 [1st Dept. 1999];  see also Butler v. Helmsley–Spear, Inc., 198 A.D.2d 131, 132, 604 N.Y.S.2d 51 [1st Dept. 1993] ) and the opinion offered by Schindler's expert that the cause of the accident was attributable to a third party's original configuration of the control box.

In view of the foregoing triable issues, Schindler's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint was also properly denied.

We have considered the parties' remaining arguments and find them unavailing.