| Delgado v New York City Hous. Auth. |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 04748 [51 AD3d 570] |
| May 27, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, First Department |
| Jeremy Delgado, an Infant, by Omar Delgado, His Father andNatural Guardian, et al., Appellants, v New York City Housing Authority,Respondent. |
—[*1] Herzfeld & Rubin, P.C., New York (Miriam Skolnik of counsel), for respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lucindo Suarez, J.), entered July 24, 2007, which, inan action for personal injuries sustained by the infant plaintiff in an apartment fire, granteddefendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed,without costs.
Defendant established a prima facie entitlement to summary judgment by submittingevidence including, inter alia, the investigating fire marshal's deposition testimony that the firehad been caused by a problematic extension cord that was situated in combustible material, ratherthan any defect in the premises' wiring system or outlet (see Butler-Francis v New York City Hous. Auth., 38 AD3d 433[2007]; Colon v H&B Plumbing & Heating, 305 AD2d 235 [2003], lv denied 1NY3d 506 [2004]). The evidence further shows that defendant had provided the requisite smokedetectors to and maintained them for the tenant of record, and that the fire had not spread becauseof the absence of a self-closing door (seeGraham v New York City Hous. Auth., 42 AD3d 323 [2007], lv denied 9 NY3d816 [2007]).
Plaintiffs' opposition failed to raise a triable issue of fact that the fire had been caused bysome reason other than a compromised extension cord. The affidavits from plaintiffs' expertswere not based on facts in the record or personally known to the expert witnesses (see Santoni v Bertelsmann Prop., Inc.,21 AD3d 712, 714-715 [2005]), but largely consisted of unsupported and conclusoryspeculation, which is insufficient to defeat summary judgment (see Gonzalez v 98 MagLeasing Corp., 95 NY2d 124, 129 [2000]; Butler-Francis, 38 AD3d at 434).Furthermore, the motion court appropriately rejected plaintiffs' theories of liability that had notbeen set forth [*2]in the notice of claim (see Chieffet v New York City Tr.Auth., 10 AD3d 526, 527 [2004]). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Saxe, Sweeny,Moskowitz and DeGrasse, JJ.