Irizarry v. Pathmark Stores, Inc.

Irizarry, 2025 NY Slip Op 45 (Appellate Division First Department 2025) · Appellate Division, First Department · January 7, 2025 · No. Index No. 152283/18 Appeal No. 3398 Case No. 2024-02890

Summary

The Appellate Division, First Department affirmed the Supreme Court's denial of defendants' motion for summary judgment in a premises liability action arising from a loading dock accident. The court held that the commercial lease was ambiguous regarding the landlord's obligation to maintain and repair the loading dock, precluding summary judgment. Additionally, defendants failed to make a prima facie showing that they lacked notice of the dangerous condition, as their supporting affidavit lacked personal knowledge of the premises' maintenance procedures.

Court
Appellate Division, First Department
Writing for the Court
Singh, J.P.; Kapnick; Scarpulla; Pitt-Burke; O'Neill Levy
Jurisdiction
New York
Decision date
January 7, 2025
Docket number
Index No. 152283/18 Appeal No. 3398 Case No. 2024-02890
Procedural posture
Appeal from Supreme Court, New York County order denying summary judgment.
Standard of review
summary judgment standard
Precedential value
published
Parties
Bradhurst Retail Owners, LLC, et al. v. Carlos Irizarry
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

premises liabilitylandlord tenantsummary judgmentcivil proceduretorts

Practice areas

tortsreal estatecivil procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the lease ambiguity precludes summary judgment in favor of the defendants
  2. Whether the defendants demonstrated lack of notice of the loading dock condition

Holdings

  1. The lease ambiguity regarding maintenance obligations precludes summary judgment for the defendants.
  2. Defendants failed to make a prima facie showing that they were not on notice of the dangerous condition.

Key quotations

The motion court correctly found that the lease for the premises was ambiguous as to who was obligated to maintain and repair the loading dock where the accident occurred, precluding summary judgment in defendants' favor (see Young v Crescent Coffee, Inc., 222 AD3d 704, 705-706 [2d Dept 2023]; see also Abramson v Eden Farm, Inc., 70 AD3d 514, 514 [1st Dept 2010]). (at 1)

Factual background

The plaintiff was injured at a loading dock on the leased premises. The lease was ambiguous as to whether the landlord or tenant was responsible for maintaining and repairing the dock. Defendants failed to show they were not on notice of the dangerous condition.

Procedural history

The Supreme Court, New York County denied defendants' motion for summary judgment and entered an order on April 22, 2024. The defendants appealed that order to the Appellate Division, First Department.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…