AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Judges

VARGHESE VARGHESE, et al., appellants v. FAQIR SINGH, et al., respondents.

ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff Varghese Varghese (hereinafter the plaintiff) was shot during an attempted robbery at a grocery store owned by the defendant Faqir Singh. The plaintiff, who was the only customer in the store when the robbery began, initially refused the robbers' demand for his gold bracelet and then yelled for help when another customer entered the store. As the robbers fled, one of them fired his gun, wounding the plaintiff in the leg.

The defendants' motion for summary judgment was properly granted. The evidence in the record does not support the plaintiffs' contention that the store owner had a duty to provide additional protective measures to insure the safety of his customers ( see, Amarante v. Rothschild, 171 A.D.2d 633; see also, Hashem v. Manemah Food Corp., 232 A.D.2d 153; Hechmeh v. 18th Ave. Custom Jewelry Ctr., 226 A.D.2d 587). Furthermore, the plaintiffs did not demonstrate that the store owner's alleged negligence in failing to provide additional protective measures was "a substantial causative factor in the sequence of events that led to [his] injury" ( Nallan v. Helmsley-Spear, Inc., 50 N.Y.2d 507, 520; see also, Ospina v. City of New York, 214 A.D.2d 551; Mkrtchyan v. 61st Woodside Assocs., 209 A.D.2d 490).

S. MILLER, J.P., O'BRIEN, FRIEDMANN, and FLORIO, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

VARGHESE v. SINGH
(Oct 4, 1999)