Case Name: Ricardo Patton, Appellant, v. New York City Housing Authority, Respondent, et al., Defendant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2016-06-30
Citations: 140 A.D.3d 659
Docket Number: 
Parties: Ricardo Patton, Appellant, v New York City Housing Authority, Respondent, et al., Defendant.
Judges: Concur — Friedman, J.P., Renwick, Andrias, Gische and Webber, JJ.
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 140
Pages: 659–660

Head Matter:
Ricardo Patton, Appellant, v New York City Housing Authority, Respondent, et al., Defendant.
[33 NYS3d 719]

Opinion:
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Barry Salman, J.), entered March 26, 2015, which granted the motion of defendant New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied.
In this action alleging negligent premises security, NYCHA met its prima facie burden of demonstrating that the assailants' identities remain unknown and that it could not be established that they were intruders who gained access to the building due to the broken door locks (see Smith v New York City Hous. Auth., 130 AD3d 427 [1st Dept 2015]). In opposition, however, plaintiff raised a triable issue of fact by pres- exiting evidence from which intruder status may be inferred. Specifically, plaintiff, who lived in the building for more than 25 years, did not recognize his assailants who did not conceal their faces (see Romero v Twin Parks Southeast Houses, Inc., 70 AD3d 484 [1st Dept 2010]; Esteves v City of New York, 44 AD3d 538 [1st Dept 2007]; Perez v New York City Hous. Auth., 294 AD2d 279 [1st Dept 2002]).
Concur — Friedman, J.P., Renwick, Andrias, Gische and Webber, JJ.