Jones v. Jones

• Decision Date: 23 June 2021
• Docket Number: Mot. Seq. No. 001-MD,Index No. 620266/2018
• Citation: 2021 NY Slip Op 33548 (U)
• Parties: ANTHONY J. JONES, Plaintiff, v. RODNEY JONES, MIMOSE S. JONES and JEAN MICHEL JOSEPH, Defendants. RODNEY JONES, MIMOSE S. JONES and JEAN MICHEL JOSEPH, Third-Party Plaintiffs, v. STAG ENTERTAINMENT, INC. and NEIL BAILEY, Third-Party Defendants.
• Court: New York Supreme Court

2021 NY Slip Op 33548(U)

ANTHONY J. JONES, Plaintiff,
v.
RODNEY JONES, MIMOSE S. JONES and JEAN MICHEL JOSEPH, Defendants.

RODNEY JONES, MIMOSE S. JONES and JEAN MICHEL JOSEPH, Third-Party Plaintiffs,
v.
STAG ENTERTAINMENT, INC. and NEIL BAILEY, Third-Party Defendants.

Index No. 620266/2018, Mot. Seq. No. 001-MD

Supreme Court, Suffolk County

June 23, 2021

Unpublished Opinion

Orig. Return Date: 03/23/2021

Motion Submit Date: 03/23/2021

PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY

Pulvers, Pulvers & Thompson, LLP

DEFENDANTS' ATTORNEYS

Christi M. Kunzig, Esq.

Devitt, Spellman, Barrett LLP

Attorneys for Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiffs Rodney Jones, Mimose S. Jones and Jean Michel Joseph

The Cahrrington Firm, PC

Attorneys for Third-Party Defendants Stag Entertainment, Inc. and Neil Bailey

DECISION AND ORDER

MARTHA L. LUFT JUDGE

Upon the e-filed documents numbered 18 through 33, it is

ORDERED that the motion by the defendants/third-party plaintiffs Rodney Jones, Mimose S. Jones, and Jean Michel Joseph for, inter alia, an order granting summary judgment dismissing the complaint in its entirety is denied; and it is further

ORDERED that this matter is scheduled for a virtual compliance conference on Thursday July 22, 2021 at 10:00am via Microsoft Teams, a link to which will be provided to the emails addresses on file with the New York State Courts Electronic Filing system (NYSCEF)

1

with Andrea Mims, law clerk to Judge Luft, for the purposes of discussing what, if any, further steps are necessary to certify this matter ready for trial, or if this matter is ready for trial, the parties may contact chambers via email at sufluft@nycourts.gov to receive a blank certification order with instructions.

This is an action to recover damages allegedly sustained by the plaintiff Anthony J. Jones as a result of an incident that occurred on August 18, 2018. By his verified complaint, as amplified by his verified bill of particulars, the plaintiff alleges, among other things, that, while he was leaving a pool party at a residence owned by the defendants Mimose S. Jones and Jean Michel Joseph, he was assaulted by unknown third parties, causing him serious personal injuries. The plaintiff further alleges that the defendant Rodney Jones resided at the subject residence and controlled same. The defendants commenced a third party action against Stag Entertainment, Inc. and Neil Bailey for contribution and indemnification, alleging that these parties promoted and conducted the August 2018 party, that they sold tickets to same, and that they sold alcohol at the event to party patrons. On August 25, 2018, nonparty Carlyle Baker was shot during a party at the same premises.

The defendants now move for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as asserted against them, arguing, inter alia, that the defendant Rodney Jones did not own the subject premises nor was he present at the time of the party, thus, he did not owe the plaintiff a duty of care, and that the defendants Mimose Jones and Jean Joseph did not breach their duty to ensure the safety of the premises, as the plaintiffs assault was unforeseeable. In support, the defendants submit, among other things, transcripts of the parties' deposition testimony and an affirmation of their attorney. The plaintiff opposes the motion, arguing, inter alia, that there are triable issues of fact as to whether the defendants had notice of the previous parties being held at the premises, precluding an award of summary judgment. In opposition, the plaintiff submits several documents, including an affirmation of his attorney transcripts of nonparty Dylan Jones's deposition testimony in relation to another civil matter related to the August 25, 2018 incident, and a copy of a newspaper article, published August 30, 2018.

As a general rule, liability for a dangerous condition on property must be predicated upon ownership, occupancy, control, or special use of the property (see Reynolds v Avon Grove Props., 129 A.D.3d 932, 12 N.Y.S.3d 199 [2d Dept 2015]; Chernoguz v Mirrer Yeshiva Cent Inst., 121 A.D.3d 737, 994 N.Y.S.2d 362 [2d Dept 2014]; Gover v Mastic Beach Prop. Owners Assn., 57...