Acosta v. 888 7th Ave. Associates
| Decision Date | 24 March 1998 |
| Citation | 670 N.Y.S.2d 79,248 A.D.2d 284 |
| Parties | 1998 N.Y. Slip Op. 2692 William ACOSTA, et al., Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. 888 7TH AVENUE ASSOCIATES, etc., et al., Defendants-Appellants. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Gail S. Kelner, for plaintiffs-respondents.
Richard S. Geffen, for defendants-appellants.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J.), entered on or about August 13, 1997, which granted plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment on liability, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Plaintiff's testimony that he was injured when the ladder on which he was standing collapsed established a prima facie case under Labor Law § 240(1), and it is not enough to avoid summary judgment for defendants simply to argue that plaintiff is the sole witness to the accident with exclusive knowledge of the facts as to how the accident happened (see, Klein v. City of New York, 89 N.Y.2d 833, 652 N.Y.S.2d 723, 675 N.E.2d 458, affg 222 A.D.2d 351, 635 N.Y.S.2d 634; Rodriguez v. New York City Hous. Auth., 194 A.D.2d 460, 599 N.Y.S.2d 263; Rodriguez v. Forest City Jay St. Assocs., 234 A.D.2d 68, 69-70, 650 N.Y.S.2d 229). Concerning plaintiffs' time to move for summary judgment, it expired on May 1, 1997 pursuant to CPLR 3212(a) (Phoenix Garden Rest. v. Chu, --- A.D.2d ----, 667 N.Y.S.2d 20, 1997 N.Y.App.Div. LEXIS 13164), but the pretrial conferences held in February and April 1997, at which discussions were had as to whether defendants would concede liability, constituted good cause for permitting the motion to be served on or about May 30, 1997. We have considered defendants' remaining argument and find it to be without merit.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Samuel v. General Cinema Theaters, Inc.
...City of New York, 89 N.Y.2d 833, 652 N.Y.S.2d 723, 675 N.E.2d 458, affg. 222 A.D.2d 351, 635 N.Y.S.2d 634, and Acosta v. 888 7th Ave. Assocs., 248 A.D.2d 284, 670 N.Y.S.2d 79, with Eitner v. 119 W. 71st St. Owners Corp., 253 A.D.2d 641, 677 N.Y.S.2d 555, and Saaverda v. East Fordham Rd. Rea......
-
Rossi v. Arnot Ogden Medical Center
...motion in the interest of judicial economy and the opposing party has not manifested any prejudice (cf., Acosta v. 888 7th Ave. Assocs., 248 A.D.2d 284, 670 N.Y.S.2d 79). We concur, however, with plaintiffs' contention that Supreme Court erred in vacating the note of issue pending the resol......
-
Torres v. New York City Transit Authority
...the motion (see, Rossi v. Arnot Ogden Med. Ctr., 252 A.D.2d 778, 779-780, 676 N.Y.S.2d 699; see also, Acosta v. 888 7th Ave. Assocs., 248 A.D.2d 284, 670 N.Y.S.2d 79). Significantly, plaintiff took nine years to serve a bill of particulars and another year and a half to commence depositions......