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.
Laura MANGIAFRENO, et al., Plaintiffs, v. WIKSTROM MACHINES, INC., Defendant-Respondent, Control Data Corporation, Defendant Third-Party Plaintiff-Respondent, Brite Office Cleaning Corp., Third-Party Defendant-Appellant.
In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the third-party defendant appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lisa, J.), dated September 12, 1996, as denied those branches of its motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the cause of action asserted in the third-party complaint for contribution based on negligence in training, equipping, and supervising the injured plaintiff, and all cross claims insofar as asserted against it.
ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, those branches of the third-party defendant's motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the cause of action asserted in the third-party complaint for contribution based on negligence in training, equipping, and supervising the injured plaintiff and all cross claims insofar as asserted against it are granted, and the third-party complaint is dismissed in its entirety.
The injured plaintiff allegedly suffered injuries as an employee of the appellant when the cleaning cart she was pushing rolled down a decline in the floor, causing her to lose her balance and fall. This activity is “so ordinary and within the ken of the average person, that there is no duty to provide instruction, warnings and/or assistance in how to perform it” (Stroschine v. Prudential-Bache Sec., 207 A.D.2d 828, 829, 616 N.Y.S.2d 545; see, Lattanzi v. International Bus. Mach. Corp., 237 A.D.2d 259, 655 N.Y.S.2d 398; Camarda v. Summit Homes, 233 A.D.2d 285, 649 N.Y.S.2d 463; June v. Sedco Sys., 203 A.D.2d 423, 610 N.Y.S.2d 570). Accordingly, the court should have dismissed the third-party complaint and all cross claims insofar as asserted against the appellant.
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Thank you for your feedback!
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.
Decided: October 27, 1997
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)