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.
Emily MALDONADO et al., Plaintiffs–Respondents, v. RUPPERT HOUSING COMPANY, INC., et al., Defendants–Appellants.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Frank Nervo, J.), entered August 22, 2022, which, to the extent appealed from, denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff Steven Torres alleges that he was injured by an attack in his girlfriend's apartment in a building owned and managed by defendants. The record demonstrates that plaintiff and his girlfriend had informed the building that the assailant had threatened them, and that he should not be allowed in the building without the police being present. Nevertheless, building employees allowed the assailant into the building and one of the employees escorted the assailant to plaintiff's apartment and left him unattended. When plaintiff subsequently opened the apartment door, he was attacked. Under the circumstances, questions of fact exist as to whether a proximate cause of plaintiff's injuries was defendants’ employees permitting the assailant entry to the building, and/or leaving the assailant alone at the apartment door without informing plaintiff (see Burgos v. Aqueduct Realty Corp., 92 N.Y.2d 544, 550, 684 N.Y.S.2d 139, 706 N.E.2d 1163 [1998]) or whether plaintiff's opening of the apartment door to the assailant was an intervening cause of injury (see Mason v. U.E.S.S. Leasing Corp., 274 A.D.2d 79, 81–82, 712 N.Y.S.2d 465 [1st Dept. 2000], affd 96 N.Y.2d 875, 730 N.Y.S.2d 770, 756 N.E.2d 58 [2001]).
We have considered defendants’ remaining arguments and find them unavailing.
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: 427
Decided: June 08, 2023
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)