Call us : (212) 482-0001

Contact us
  • Email the firm
Russo & Gould LLP LOGO
  • About Us
  • Attorneys
  • Practice Areas
    • Alcohol and Beverage Law
    • Child Victims Act & Sexual Misconduct Coverage & Defense
    • Commercial Litigation
    • Construction Accident Liability
    • Criminal Defense Practice
    • Employment Litigation
    • Environmental Complex Tort Litigation
    • First Party Benefits Defense
    • General Property and Casualty Liability
    • Insurance Coverage Litigation
    • Life, Health and Disability Litigation
    • Medical Malpractice / Nursing Home Defense
    • Product Liability
    • Professional Liability/ E&O/ D&O
    • Transportation Liability- Personal and Commercial Auto
  • News
    • News
    • Recent Decisions
    • Archived News
  • Careers
  • Locations
  • Contact Us
  • Home
  • Russo & Gould News
  • Marcin J. Kurzatkowski Prevails on the Plaintiff's Two Appeals Before the Second Department

News Details

Marcin J. Kurzatkowski Prevails on the Plaintiff's Two Appeals Before the Second Department

Friday, May 18, 2018

On May 16, 2018, the Second Department issued two Decisions and Orders in the matter of Kwang Bok Yi v. Open Karaoke Corp., et al. (under Docket Nos. 2015-01836 and 2016-11486) which affirmed the Decisions of the Court below.

The appeal under Docket No. 2015-01836 concerned the plaintiff’s appeal of the denial of his motion for a default judgment as against three defendants that did not appear and/or answer the plaintiff’s amended complaint in a timely manner. In affirming the Decision of the Court below, the Second Department held that the plaintiff failed to submit adequate proof of facts sufficient to establish viable causes of action against the late appearing defendants.

The appeal under Docket No. 2016-11486 concerned the plaintiff’s appeal of the Order which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment. In his complaint, the plaintiff alleged that he was assaulted by a karaoke bar employee outside of the defendant’s karaoke bar. At the conclusion of discovery, the defendants moved for summary judgment to dismiss the plaintiff’s complaint in its entirety on the grounds that there was no proof of negligent hiring, retention and/or supervision. In affirming the Decision of the Court below which granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment, the Second Department held that the defendants established that they did not know and/or should not have known the employee’s violent propensities and/or propensity for conduct which caused the plaintiff’s alleged injuries. Furthermore, the Second Department affirmed the lower Court’s dismissal of the plaintiff’s 42 USC § 1983 claim.

Search

Russo & Gould LLP provides trusted legal counsel and representation on a wide range of civil liability and insurance matters in New York, Buffalo, New Jersey, Pennsylvania and Connecticut.

33 Whitehall Street, 16th Floor New York, NY 10004

info@russogould.com

(212) 482-0001 (212) 482-0002

 
Terms and Conditions

Copyright © 2025 Russo & Gould LLP


Law firm website design by Business Edge


Attorney Advertising