| Hillen v Queens Long Is. Med. Group, P.C. |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 10586 [57 AD3d 946] |
| December 30, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Majorie Hillen, Appellant, v Queens Long Island MedicalGroup, P.C., Respondent. |
—[*1] Hoey, King, Toker & Epstein, New York, N.Y. (Jennifer L. Budner of counsel), forrespondent.
In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order ofthe Supreme Court, Suffolk County (R. Doyle, J.), dated September 4, 2007, which granted thedefendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
A property owner has a duty to take reasonable measures to control the foreseeable conductof third parties on the property to prevent them from intentionally harming or creating anunreasonable risk of harm to others (see DeRyss v New York Cent. R.R. Co., 275 NY 85[1937]; Jaume v Ry Mgt. Co., 2 AD3d 590, 591 [2003]; Murphy v Turian House,232 AD2d 535 [1996]). This duty arises when there is an ability and opportunity to controlsuch conduct, and an awareness of the need to do so (see D'Amico v Christie, 71 NY2d76, 85 [1987]; DeRyss v New York Cent. R.R. Co., 275 NY 85 [1937]; Jaume v RyMgt. Co., 2 AD3d at 591).
Here, the defendant medical facility made a prima facie showing of its entitlement tojudgment as a matter of law by submitting evidence demonstrating that it did not have the abilityand opportunity to control the conduct of the unidentified child who suddenly ran ahead of hismother and accidentally bumped into the elderly plaintiff, and that it had no awareness of theneed to control the conduct of the child, who was under his mother's supervision (see Jaume vRy Mgt. Co., 2 AD3d at 591; Lazar v TJX Cos., 1 AD3d 319 [2003]; Lee vDurow's Rest., 238 AD2d 384, 385 [1997]). In opposition to the motion, the plaintiff failedto raise a triable issue of fact (see Troiano v DeMarco, 50 AD3d [*2]1020, 1021 [2008]; Jaume v Ry Mgt. Co., 2 AD3d at 591;Lazar v TJX Cos., 1 AD3d 319 [2003]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properlygranted the defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Prudenti, P.J.,Dillon, Eng and Leventhal, JJ., concur.