Case Name: Luis Batista, Respondent, v. New York City Transit Authority, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 2009-10-08
Citations: 66 A.D.2d 433
Docket Number: 
Parties: Luis Batista, Respondent, v New York City Transit Authority, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 66
Pages: 433–434

Head Matter:
Luis Batista, Respondent, v New York City Transit Authority, Appellant.
[886 NYS2d 403]—

Opinion:
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Donna M. Mills, J.), entered September 3, 2008, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the brief, denied defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of defendant dismissing the complaint.
The assertion of plaintiffs expert that there were defects in the staircase on which plaintiff fell is insufficient to raise an issue of fact as to proximate cause, because there is no evidence connecting plaintiffs fall to those defects (Kane v Estia Greek Rest., 4 AD3d 189 [2004]; see also Telfeyan v City of New York, 40 AD3d 372 [2007]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, Catterson, Renwick and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.