Was There Objective Evidence to Hold MTA
Rosemary Orji allegedly was
injured when she fell while aboard a bus. Orji testified at her deposition that
as she was walking toward the rear seating area shortly after boarding the bus,
the bus stopped at a red traffic light, which caused her to lose her grip on
the railing and fall onto her left side.
Orji filed a personal injury
action against the MTA Bus Company and “John Doe,” the owner and
operator of the bus, respectively, alleging that they were negligent in the
ownership and operation of the bus. MTA moved for summary judgment dismissing
the complaint, arguing that the movement that caused Orji to fall was not
unusual or violent and was not of a different class than the jerks and jolts
commonly experienced in city bus travel. Supreme Court denied the motion
and, upon reargument, adhered to the original determination. MTA appealed.
Was Club Liable for Injury Caused by Puddle in Locker Room?
Jason Briggs brought a premises
liability action seeking to recover for personal injuries he sustained when he
was allegedly caused to slip and fall in the shower locker room at the workout
at a Planet Fitness gym. Briggs contended he finished his workout and went into
the locker room to shower as he normally did. He undressed and prepared to take
a shower in the middle stall. He was barefoot. He testified he walked into the
shower area and was attempting to go into the middle (third) shower. Briggs
claimed he slipped and fell in the area just before he got into the shower
stall. He testified that, after he fell, he took three photographs of a puddle
that was about one foot by two feet and approximately three to four feet from
the shower shall. He believed the accident occurred just before 9:00 p.m.
Briggs testified that he did not
see the puddle before he fell and, when asked if he stepped in the puddle, he
responded “1 would assume so.” When further questioned if he did not
know that he stepped into the puddle, he responded “I don’t know because I
didn’t see the puddle, my eyes were looking where 1 was going.” Briggs
testified that the surrounding ground near the puddle was mostly wet all over.
After his fall, Briggs got dressed and went to the front counter to advise
staff of his injury.
Court Decides Whether Facts Justify
Grecia Gross owns
shares of stock in the building corporation appurtenant to cooperative
apartment 2A and is also the lessee under a proprietary lease. The building is
located on the corner of Lexington Avenue and is directly above the 4/5/6
subway line. The apartment is located directly above a ground floor commercial
space leased to Joe & The Juice since February 2018. Joe & The
Juice is a coffee shop/juice bar, which utilizes blenders and coffee grinders
as necessary components of its business.
Since October 2018, Gross asserted that
her apartment had been “plagued with excessive, disruptive noise
from” Joe & The Juice consisting of “incredibly loud bass music,
excessive banging, and extremely loud whining machine noises … nearly
every single morning” from approximately 7:00 a.m. until after 9:00
p.m. Gross alleged the noise prevented her from being able to sleep or
rest, make telephone calls, and caused her headaches, undue stress and anxiety.
Gross sought to address the issue by speaking with the store’s employees,
requesting remedial efforts by the board of the corporation, and hiring an
acoustical consulting service company, Acoustilog Inc. to perform sound
testing and acoustical recordings from April 1, 2022 through April 11, 2022.
Commission Suit On Purchase by Assignment of 3rd Party Contract
Procuring Cause of Sale– Direct and Proximate Link?
Kassin Sabbagh Realty LLC sought a
brokerage commission from 125th St. Holding Co. LLC and 125th
Street Bopaz LLC on a transaction of which it alleges it was the procuring
cause. The Manhattan property located at 51 East 125th Street. Sabbagh made
David Israel aware of the property on November 6, 2018. Subsequently, on
February 25, 2019, Israel contacted Kassin about making an offer but Kassin
informed Israel that the proposed offer was too low because the seller was
seeking $13 million. Before Holding/Bopaz were able to make an offer, the
seller entered into a contract to sell the property to a third party. However,
before a closing took place, Kassin, acting as Holing/Bopaz’ broker, set up a
meeting between Israel, the seller and the third-party purchaser. At the March
28, 2019 meeting, Kassin alleged that Israel proposed acquiring the property
through the assignment of the third-party purchase agreement. Instead, Israel
alleged that through the efforts of a different broker, it was able to purchase
the property through the assignment of the third-party purchase agreement.
Could Bride’s Family Invoke Contractual Force Majeure Clause to Obtain Refund of Deposit For Wedding Band?
Adam Greenberg d/b/a Around Town Entertainment sued Alyssa Gallagher, John Gallagher, and Diane Gallagher for breach of contract for their failure to comply with the cancellation provisions in their contract for the services of a wedding band. The court held a trial. Greenberg, represented by counsel, testified and also called Alyssa Gallagher on its case. The Gallaghers, representing themselves, presented the testimony of John and Diane Gallagher, Alyssa’s parents.
Court Decides If Patron’s Complaint Should Be Dismissed If He Initiated the Squabble
Cecil Gibbs alleged in his complaint that Azizullah Nasiry injured Gibbs through recklessness, carelessness, and negligence.
On October 18, 2017, Nasiry was employed by 1429 Food Corp. d/b/a Kennedy Fried Chicken. 1429 Food Corp. is a small storefront eat-in and takeout chicken restaurant located at 1429 Nostrand Avenue in Brooklyn, New York. Nasiry was employed in the capacity of store manager.
Did Visible Shackles
Violate Defendant’s Constitutional Rights?
The use of visible shackles during the guilt phase of
a trial is forbidden in the absence of a special need. Is handcuffing the
defendant also forbidden during the jury’s reading of its verdict and the
court’s polling of the jurors. Here, the trial court ordered ordering defendant
to be handcuffed when the jury returned to announce its verdict without
providing an on-the-record, individualized explanation for the restraints. Was
that a harmless error or an error that required reversal of
defendant’s conviction and a new trial?
Oscar Sanders was tried before a jury on one count of
attempted assault in the first degree and one count of assault in the second
degree (arising from a physical altercation with the victim) and two counts of
criminal contempt (resulting from his subsequent violations of an order of
protection). After the jury advised the court that it had reached a verdict but
before the jury returned to the courtroom, defense counsel observed Sanders in
handcuffs. Counsel made the following objection in open court:
Did Homeowner Have
Actual/Constructive Notice of Defect?
Joan Maria Vaz brought a personal injury action
arising from an accident at the home of Giusseppina Zimmitti.
Zimmitti moved for summary judgment dismissing Vaz’
The accident took place when the dining room chair
that Vaz was seated in broke and collapsed under her, resulting in injuries.
She commenced an action and asserted in her complaint that Zimmitti was
negligent as she failed to use the degree of care which a prudent person would
in like circumstances, despite having had actual and/or constructive notice of
the dangerous and defective condition of the chair.
Court Navigates Complex
Four-Part Rule Amid a Paucity of Precedent
Zhiwen Yang was a patient of the Dr. Gregory K.
Harmon from August 24, 2015, to November 25, 2015, for the treatment of a
cataract of the right eye. During that period, Harmon performed an operative
procedure to remove the cataract. Following that procedure, Harmon allegedly
prescribed medications to Yang, including Ketorolac. Yang allegedly sustained
injuries including loss of vision in her right eye.
In April 2017, Yang, and her husband, Keping Qu,
suing derivatively, commenced an action to recover damages for medical
malpractice and lack of informed consent against, among others, Harmon and his
medical practice, Gregory K. Harmon, M.D., P.C. The Yangs alleged that Harmons
departed from the accepted standard of care in providing pre-operative,
operative, and post-operative care, and prescribed contraindicated medications
for Yang, without informing her of the risks, potential adverse reactions, or