Published on:

Defendants move for summary judgment…cont

Shortly thereafter, CUCS found a non-elevator accessed apartment, on the second floor of a newly constructed building, located at 1615 Hobart Avenue in the Bronx. The building was owned by defendant LPI. The plaintiff viewed the apartment and subsequently executed a lease on February 24, 2007.

After living in the apartment for about four months, the plaintiff alleges he fell going up the stairs in the common area of the building on June 14, 2007, at approximately 1:00 p.m. After he fell, he picked himself up and proceeded to his apartment. He felt immediate pain to his leg but the pain lessened within half an hour. Plaintiff reported the accident later in the day to his home attendant. Consequently, the home attendant called 911. An ambulance responded and recommended the plaintiff go to the hospital but he refused. The plaintiff alleges that as a result of the fall he sustained blunt force trauma and a laceration to the left leg, resulting in infection which led to the subsequent amputation above the knee on August 30, 2007.

Plaintiff commenced a negligence action against PHCI, CUCS and LPI. With respect to PHCI, the plaintiff alleges that it failed to provide constant supervision, assistance and services and negligently provided inappropriate housing for the plaintiff. The plaintiff further alleges that CUCS deviated from good and accepted standards of social and human services and that it negligently placed the plaintiff in inappropriate housing. Lastly, plaintiff contends that LPI was negligent in the maintenance of the subject staircase.

LPI moves for summary judgment on the grounds the subject staircase was safe, complied with all applicable rules and regulations and free of any defects. The Plaintiff did not submit any opposition to LPI’s motion. As such, that motion is granted.

PHCI and CUCS move for summary judgment on various grounds. PHCI contends that it did not breach any duty owed to the personal injury plaintiff since it did not locate the subject apartment. Both PHCI and CUCS contend that it was the plaintiff who, upon inspecting the apartment, chooses to accept it. The plaintiff was free to reject the apartment. In addition, PHCI argues that the plaintiff’s injury are not casually related to any alleged negligence of any of the named defendants. Instead, the moving defendant contends that the amputation of the plaintiff’s leg is the result of a long standing medical condition unrelated to the fall on the subject staircase.

The issue is whether or not defendant’s motion for summary judgment should be granted.

The Court finds that the PHCI defendants met their initial burden in establishing entitlement to summary judgment on the grounds that the plaintiff’s amputation was not a result of any of the defendant’s alleged negligence. It annexed the affirmed report of its medical expert surgeon, a board certified vascular and thoracic surgeon. Upon reviewing the plaintiff’s medical records which included: records from Albert Einstein hospital, Jacobi Medical Center, Bronx Center for Rehabilitation and the Ambulance Call Reports generated by the New York City Fire Department and PHCI’s records, plaintiff’s deposition transcript and DR’s deposition transcript, The surgeon opined that the fall on June 14, 2007 was not a substantial contributing factor, thus not a proximate cause of the amputation of the plaintiff’s left leg. The doctor concluded that the plaintiff’s severe underlying vascular disease which included arterial insufficiency and deep vein thrombosis was the proximate cause of the amputation of the plaintiff’s left leg.

Contact Information