Majority
p. 1820Dareya Nathan, an Infant, By Her Parents and Natural Guardians, Daryl Nathan and Another, et al., Appellants, v Rochester Housing Authority, Respondent. [890 NYS2d 870]
Memorandum: Plaintiffs commenced this action seeking damages for injuries sustained by plaintiff daughter when she fell through the balusters of a railing in a building owned by defendant. Contrary to the contention of plaintiffs, Supreme Court properly denied their motion for partial summary judgment on the issue of liability. “Plaintiffs’] expert[s] cited no authority, treatise, standard, building code, article or other corroborating
p. 1821
evidence to support [their] assertion that good and accepted engineering and building safety practices called for the installation” of balusters with narrower gaps than those in the building in question (Buchholz v Trump 767 Fifth Ave., LLC, 5 NY3d 1 , 8-9 [2005]). “The opinion of a qualified expert that a plaintiff’s injuries were caused by a deviation from relevant industry standards has no probative force where the expert’s ultimate assertions are speculative or unsupported by any evidentiary foundation” (Wong v Goldbaum, 23 AD3d 277 , 279 [2005]; see Diaz v New York Downtown Hosp., 99 NY2d 542 , 544 [2002]). Plaintiffs thus failed to meet their initial burden on the motion, and we need not consider the sufficiency of defendant’s opposing papers (see generally Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320 , 324 [1986]; Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851 , 853 [1985]). Present — Smith, J.R, Fahey, Garni and Green, JJ.
Cases cited
- Buchholz v. Trump 767 Fifth Avenue, LLC 5 NY3d 1 at 8-9 p. 1821
- Wong v. Goldbaum 23 AD3d 277 at 279 p. 1821
- Diaz v. New York Downtown Hospital 99 NY2d 542 at 544 p. 1821
- Alvarez v. Prospect Hospital 68 NY2d 320 at 324 p. 1821
- Winegrad v. New York University Medical Center 64 NY2d 851 at 853 p. 1821