Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Kirsten M. v. Bettina Equities Co.
Citations: 222 A.D.2d 201; 634 N.Y.S.2d 481; 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12633
Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; December 4, 1995; New York; State Appellate Court
A judgment by the Supreme Court of New York County, presided over by Justice Martin B. Stecher on September 29, 1994, has been unanimously reversed after a non-jury trial that initially awarded the plaintiff, a 25-year-old woman, $250,970. The court dismissed the complaint against the defendants and directed the Clerk to enter judgment in their favor. The plaintiff was attacked shortly after entering her apartment building on East 85th Street, where she was confronted by a knife-wielding assailant who subsequently robbed and raped her. The perpetrator has not been apprehended. The plaintiff argued that the building's security was inadequate, citing a defectively hung front door that allowed easy access. An expert testified that he could enter the building quickly using a credit card due to this defect. Despite the trial court's earlier ruling, the appellate court found a lack of evidence regarding how the assailant gained entry to the building, thereby failing to establish proximate cause. The court noted that merely having a defective lock does not prove that it was the means by which the assailant accessed the premises. The factors considered by the trial court—such as the faulty lock, crime history in the area, and an unlocked laundry room—were deemed insufficient to sustain liability without direct evidence of entry method. The appellate court reiterated that the burden of proof lay with the plaintiff, which was not met. The ruling was concurred by Justices Murphy, Sullivan, Wallach, Ross, and Williams.