After falling down a “poorly lit” staircase, Plaintiff MA initiateda personal injury case in the New York County Supreme Court seeking compensation for his injuries. When he later filed a pre-trial (summary judgment) motion for relief in his favor, the judge assigned to the matter granted that request and found the Defendant-Landlord liable.
On appeal, the Appellate Division, First Department, noted that an expert affidavit submitted by MA had established that the 115-inch-wide staircase violated local code in that it had only a single handrail running down the middle of the structural element, and that defect contributed to MA’s injuries. [Local law required handrails on both sides when stairs are wider than 44 inches.]
Since the owner failed to raise “an issue of fact” in opposition to the motion, the AD1 affirmed the outcome notwithstanding a purported procedural defect – i.e., MA’s failure to include the answer with his motion [as required by CPLR 3212(b)], as the defendants had included a copy in their opposition papers, thus ensuring a complete record was available for the court's consideration.
Think they railed when they got that decision?