Gordon Salyes v Urban American Management Corp. et al.
Attorneys and Parties
Brief Summary
Elevator maintenance and premises liability, including whether a building owner is liable for an elevator drop accident and whether the elevator maintenance contractor must contractually indemnify the owners.
The lower court denied the Owners' motion for summary judgment on their contractual indemnification cross-claim against Schindler Elevator Corporation (Schindler) and granted plaintiff summary judgment on liability against both the Owners and Schindler.
The appellate court modified the order to grant the Owners conditional summary judgment on their contractual indemnification cross-claim against Schindler, while otherwise affirming the grant of plaintiff's summary judgment on liability.
The court held that disputes about whether all of plaintiff's injuries were caused by the accident went only to damages, not liability. Elevator malfunctions of this kind do not ordinarily occur absent negligence, and Schindler's contract did not allow it to leave an elevator in an unsafe condition even if the elevator was obsolete and the Owners had been warned. The service contract's broad indemnification clause was triggered because the accident arose from an elevator Schindler was obligated to service, repair, and maintain.
Background
Plaintiff was injured when the elevator he was riding in abruptly dropped four floors. The building was owned by BSREP UA 3333 Broadway LLC (BSREP) and managed by UAB Property Management, LLC (UAB). A prior joint owner had entered into an elevator service contract with Schindler, and the parties did not dispute that the current Owners inherited that contract. Plaintiff sued the Owners and Schindler for personal injuries, and the Owners asserted a contractual indemnification cross-claim against Schindler.
Lower Court Decision
Supreme Court, New York County denied the Owners' motion for summary judgment on their contractual indemnification cross-claim against Schindler and granted plaintiff summary judgment on liability against both the Owners and Schindler.
Appellate Division Reversal
The Appellate Division, First Department modified the order only to the extent of granting the Owners conditional summary judgment on their contractual indemnification cross-claim against Schindler. It otherwise affirmed the determination that plaintiff was entitled to summary judgment on liability against both the Owners and Schindler.
Legal Significance
The decision reinforces that in elevator accident cases, arguments over whether the accident caused some or all of the claimed injuries concern damages rather than liability. It also confirms that a maintenance contractor may still face liability where its contract disclaims responsibility for obsolescence but also requires that no elevator be left in an unsafe condition. In addition, a broad performance-of-the-work indemnification clause can support conditional summary judgment for building owners when the accident arises from equipment the contractor was obligated to maintain.
An elevator maintenance company cannot avoid liability or contractual indemnification obligations simply by pointing to elevator obsolescence or the owner's awareness of needed modernization where the contract still requires the elevator not be left unsafe and the accident arose from equipment the contractor was hired to maintain.