Case Name: Mirella Thomas et al., Respondents, v. James Wu & Sons, Inc., Appellant, et al., Defendant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1992-06-25
Citations: 184 A.D.2d 440
Docket Number: 
Parties: Mirella Thomas et al., Respondents, v James Wu & Sons, Inc., Appellant, et al., Defendant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 184
Pages: 440–441

Head Matter:
Mirella Thomas et al., Respondents, v James Wu & Sons, Inc., Appellant, et al., Defendant.

Opinion:
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Fingerhood, J.), entered November 27, 1991, which denied defendant-appellant's motion for summary judgment, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Even were the facts entirely undisputed, there are issues relative to foreseeability and proximate cause which are best left to the trier of fact to resolve (see, Raider v Friedman, 162 AD2d 112; Rotz v City of New York, 143 AD2d 301, 304). Defendant's contentions as to the superceding or intervening cause by a third party, are not sufficiently persuasive to preclude triable issues of fact as to these matters. Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Asch, Kassal and Rubin, JJ.