Singleton v. New York City Housing Authority
Opinion of the Court
—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant third-party plaintiff New York City Housing Authority appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Held, J.), entered September 5, 1991, which granted the motion of the third-party defendants to dismiss the third-party complaint.
Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, and the motion is denied.
If the third-party defendants owned the playground, they had the duty to maintain it in a reasonably safe condition, and may be held liable if the trier of fact finds that the injury was foreseeable and resulted from any negligence on their part (see, Adams v New York City Hous. Auth., 165 AD2d 849; Rosario v City of New York, 157 AD2d 467; Cruz v New York City Tr. Auth., 136 AD2d 196). In reviewing an order granting summary judgment, the evidentiary facts alleged by the party opposing the motion and the inferences which may be drawn from them must be accepted as true (see, O’Neill v Town of Fishkill, 134 AD2d 487). The appellant alleged clear specific facts supporting its claim, and the allegations were supported by evidence in the form of the infant plaintiff’s deposition testimony. Therefore, it was error to dismiss the third-party complaint. Thompson, J. P., Rosenblatt, Ritter, Krausman and Friedmann, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.