DeJesus v. Todaro, 3758.

Decision Date27 May 2004
Docket Number3758.
Citation7 A.D.3d 469,777 N.Y.S.2d 474,2004 NY Slip Op 04247
PartiesJOSE L. DeJESUS, Appellant, v. HENRY TODARO, JR., ET AL., Defendants, and TruSERV CORPORATION, Respondent.
CourtNew York Supreme Court — Appellate Division

There is nothing in this record that tends to show that respondent, a cooperative wholesaler and main supplier of goods and services to plaintiff's employer's store, exercised any control, or had the right to exercise any control, over the allegedly defective elevator or the work plaintiff was doing when injured (see Schoenwandt v Jamfro Corp., 261 AD2d 117 [1999]; Andreula v Steinway Baraqafood Corp., 243 AD2d 596 [1997]). It is "mere hope" on plaintiff's part to argue that evidence of such control will be uncovered in disclosure (see Moukarzel v Montefiore Med. Ctr., 235 AD2d 239, 240 [1997]).

Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Lerner, Friedman, Marlow and Gonzalez, JJ.

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • People v. Beaker
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • May 27, 2004

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT