Rodriquez v Concourse Vil. Inc.
2013 NY Slip Op 01354 [104 AD3d 410]
March 5, 2013
Appellate Division, First Department
As corrected through Wednesday, April 24, 2013


Kenneth Rodriquez et al.,Respondents,
v
Concourse Village Inc., Appellant.

[*1]

Richard C. Rubinstein , New York, for appellant.

Wingate, Russotti, Shapiro & Halperin, LLP, New York (William P. Hepner ofcounsel), for respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lizbeth Gonzalez, J.), entered on or aboutAugust 3, 2012, which, in this personal injury action arising from a fall in defendant'sbuilding, denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint,unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff raised issues of fact as to whether defendant complied with its inspectionschedule on the day of the accident, and when the area was last inspected before theaccident (see Williams v NewYork City Hous. Auth., 99 AD3d 613 [1st Dept 2012]; Deluna-Cole vTonali, Inc., 303 AD2d 186, 186 [1st Dept 2003]). According summary judgment isprecluded.

In the light of the foregoing we need not reach the other issues raised.Concur—Gonzalez, P.J., Mazzarelli, Renwick, Richter and Gische, JJ.


NYPTI Decisions © 2026 is a project of New York Prosecutors Training Institute (NYPTI) made possible by leveraging the work we've done providing online research and tools to prosecutors.

NYPTI would like to thank New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, New York State Senate's Open Legislation Project, New York State Unified Court System, New York State Law Reporting Bureau and Free Law Project for their invaluable assistance making this project possible.

Install the free RECAP extensions to help contribute to this archive. See https://free.law/recap/ for more information.