Sun Yau Ko v. Lincoln Savings Bank
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984-03-01 · cited 17×
The case involved plaintiffs seeking to recover the value of gold bars stolen from their safe deposit box during a bank burglary, based on a bailor-bailee relationship with the defendant bank. The Appellate Division reversed the denial of summary judgment and dismissed the complaint, holding that the bank had met its burden by establishing the burglary and its security measures through an unchallenged affidavit, shifting the burden to plaintiffs to raise a factual issue of negligence. Plaintiffs failed to do so, as their attorney's unsupported affidavit was inadequate and they had chosen not to conduct discovery despite having the opportunity. The court rejected reliance on precedents like Veihelmann v. Manufacturers Safe Deposit Co. because the bank had affirmatively shown the cause of loss was burglary, and it distinguished the dissent's concerns about the alarm system activation as unsupported by the record.