Stinton v Robins Wood

3149 Words13 Pages
78-year-old Ethel Flanzraich slipped and fell on steps at 52 Greentree Road in Monticello, New York which were property owned by Robin's Wood, Inc. In greater detail provided by the The Medical-Legal News also noted that Flanzraich was at her condominium at the time and the actual steps were located in the common area. Injuries resulting from this fall included fractures to both her left arm and left leg. Flanzraich alleged that her fall was caused by the negligent application of paint to the steps. Robin’s Wood, Inc identified Anthony Monforte as its employee who did the actual painting of the steps. The property owners also alluded to the fact that they would contact Montforte and provide diligent attempts to have him appear in court. Court hearings were reset twice due to failure of producing Monforte or a representative in court. This occurred even after The Supreme Court ordered they provide someone within 30 days. On August 18, 2004, the plaintiff moved to strike the defendant's answer based upon the defendant's failure to produce a representative. The defendant countered this claim by arguing that it made meticulous efforts to reaching Monforte by sending him letters to appear and to contact the company. In a final letter it even stated that if he failed to be in contact he would then be issued a subpoena. It was not until after this claim that the court was then informed that Montforte was no longer an employee of Robin’s Wood, Inc. Monforte was in fact subpoenaed to appear and did not, the following month, the Supreme Court granted the motion to strike the defendant's answer. This in evidently meant that the plaintiff would be granted a default judgment and would be granted what they were asking. The trial judge decided that Robin’s Wood, Inc was indeed liable. It was rendered $150,000 for future pain and suffering, $300,000 for past suffering and

More about Stinton v Robins Wood

Open Document