You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Delgado v. Nouveau Elevator Industries, Inc.

Citations: 232 A.D.2d 256; 648 N.Y.S.2d 909; 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10299

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York; October 17, 1996; New York; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

The Supreme Court of New York County, under Justice Beverly Cohen, issued an order on August 17, 1995, granting the defendant-respondent's motion for summary judgment to dismiss the complaint against it. The court also denied the plaintiff's cross-motion for summary judgment. The decision was based on the freight elevator service contract and the testimony of a former employee of the defendant, which indicated that the defendant had no obligation to inspect, maintain, or repair the elevator shaft-way or hoistway door. The plaintiff failed to provide an affidavit, and the affidavit from the plaintiff's attorney did not present any factual disputes relevant to the case. The ruling was affirmed without costs, with concurrence from Justices Murphy, Rubin, Ross, Williams, and Andrias.

Legal Issues Addressed

Evidentiary Requirements for Opposing Summary Judgment

Application: The plaintiff's failure to provide an affidavit and reliance solely on the affidavit from the plaintiff's attorney, which did not establish any factual disputes, was insufficient to oppose the motion for summary judgment.

Reasoning: The plaintiff failed to provide an affidavit, and the affidavit from the plaintiff's attorney did not present any factual disputes relevant to the case.

Obligations Under Contract Law

Application: The court determined that the defendant had no contractual obligation to inspect, maintain, or repair the elevator shaft-way or hoistway door based on the freight elevator service contract and supporting testimony.

Reasoning: The decision was based on the freight elevator service contract and the testimony of a former employee of the defendant, which indicated that the defendant had no obligation to inspect, maintain, or repair the elevator shaft-way or hoistway door.

Summary Judgment in Civil Procedure

Application: The court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant, concluding that there were no factual disputes requiring trial and that the defendant was entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

Reasoning: The Supreme Court of New York County, under Justice Beverly Cohen, issued an order on August 17, 1995, granting the defendant-respondent's motion for summary judgment to dismiss the complaint against it.