Narrative Opinion Summary
The Supreme Court of Bronx County, under Justice Bertram Katz, issued an order on June 12, 1997, denying the defendant's motion for summary judgment. The decision was unanimously affirmed without costs. The court found that there was a factual dispute regarding whether the assailants of the plaintiff were intruders at the senior citizens residence where the plaintiff was visiting his mother. This conclusion was supported by an eyewitness affidavit stating that the assailants, who were not senior citizens, were loitering outside the building when the plaintiff and the eyewitness arrived. They allegedly followed the plaintiff into the lobby through a door with a broken lock. The court distinguished this case from *Burgos v Aqueduct Realty Corp.*, where the plaintiff could only speculate about the means of entry. Judges Sullivan, Milonas, Mazzarelli, and Andrias concurred with the decision.
Legal Issues Addressed
Distinguishing Precedentsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court distinguished this case from previous precedent where the plaintiff lacked definitive evidence of the assailants' entry method, highlighting the significance of specific evidence in overcoming summary judgment.
Reasoning: The court distinguished this case from Burgos v Aqueduct Realty Corp., where the plaintiff could only speculate about the means of entry.
Eyewitness Testimonysubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: An eyewitness affidavit was pivotal in establishing the factual dispute necessary to deny summary judgment, as it provided details about the assailants' actions prior to and during the incident.
Reasoning: This conclusion was supported by an eyewitness affidavit stating that the assailants, who were not senior citizens, were loitering outside the building when the plaintiff and the eyewitness arrived.
Factual Dispute Requirementsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The presence of an eyewitness affidavit indicating the assailants were loitering and entered through a broken door constituted a factual dispute, preventing summary judgment.
Reasoning: The court found that there was a factual dispute regarding whether the assailants of the plaintiff were intruders at the senior citizens residence where the plaintiff was visiting his mother.
Summary Judgment Standardsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment due to the presence of a factual dispute regarding the identity and entry method of the assailants.
Reasoning: The Supreme Court of Bronx County, under Justice Bertram Katz, issued an order on June 12, 1997, denying the defendant's motion for summary judgment.