From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Farrell v. Okeic

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 21, 2003
303 A.D.2d 957 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)

Opinion

CA 02-02262

March 21, 2003.

Appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County (Nicholson, J.), entered September 18, 2002, which denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing reinstated claims.

BARTH, SULLIVAN BEHR, BUFFALO (LAURENCE D. BEHR OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

MILFORD, LYNCH SHANNON, ESQS., SYRACUSE (JOHN A. CIRANDO OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

PRESENT: GREEN, J.P., PINE, HURLBUTT, AND LAWTON, JJ.


MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed with costs.

Memorandum:

Plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for injuries he sustained when he fell through the loft of a barn owned by defendant. On a prior appeal, we modified an order granting defendant's cross motion for summary judgment seeking dismissal of the complaint by denying that part of the cross motion seeking dismissal of the common-law negligence and Labor Law § 200 claims and reinstating those claims (Farrell v. Okeic, 266 A.D.2d 892). Supreme Court properly denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the reinstated claims. "Initially, we note that successive summary judgment motions `should be discouraged in the absence of a showing of newly discovered evidence or other sufficient cause'" (Town of Wilson v. Town of Newfane, 192 A.D.2d 1095, 1095; see Marine Midland Bank v. Fisher, 85 A.D.2d 905, 906). Defendant failed to show that the evidence submitted in support of the motion was newly discovered or that it could not have been submitted on the prior cross motion (see Ashford v. Rochester Hosp. Serv. Corp., 214 A.D.2d 954, 955). In any event, defendant failed to tender sufficient evidence to demonstrate the absence of material issues of fact whether plaintiff fell through the area of the loft floor that plaintiff's employer was hired to repair and whether the deteriorated condition of the loft floor was open and obvious (see Farrell, 266 A.D.2d at 893; see generally Alvarez v. Prospect Hosp., 68 N.Y.2d 320, 324).


Summaries of

Farrell v. Okeic

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Mar 21, 2003
303 A.D.2d 957 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
Case details for

Farrell v. Okeic

Case Details

Full title:ALBERT N. FARRELL, JR., PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. JOSEPH OKEIC…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Mar 21, 2003

Citations

303 A.D.2d 957 (N.Y. App. Div. 2003)
755 N.Y.S.2d 677

Citing Cases

Town of Angelica v. Smith

Second, we may properly entertain the appeal with respect to the Town's cross motion for summary judgment…

Sexstone v. Amato

Memorandum: Contrary to defendant's contention, Supreme Court did not err in granting plaintiff's motion for…