Almanzar v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Almanzar v. City of New York

18 A.D.3d 284, 794 N.Y.S.2d 644, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5192

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedMay 12, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 18 A.D.3d 284 (Almanzar v. City of New York) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Almanzar v. City of New York, 18 A.D.3d 284, 794 N.Y.S.2d 644, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5192 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marcy S. Friedman, J.), entered on or about December 5, 2001, which, in an action for personal injuries allegedly caused by defendant-respondent building owner’s negligent removal of snow in front of its lessee’s premises, inter alia, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The action was properly dismissed in the absence of any evidence tending to rebut defendant’s denial of any efforts to remove the snow that had accumulated in front of its lessee’s premises (see Jiuz v City of New York, 244 AD2d 298, 298-299 [1997]). Nor does plaintiff adduce any evidence that defendant created or increased a dangerous condition on the sidewalk (see Gaudino v 511 W 232nd St. Owners Corp., 279 AD2d 272, 273 [2001]). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Sullivan, Gonzalez, Sweeny and Catterson, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marcy S. Friedman, J.), entered on or about December 5, 2001, which, in an action for personal injuries allegedly caused by defendant-respondent building owner’s negligent removal of snow in front of its lessee’s premises, inter alia, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The action was properly dismissed in the absence of any evidence tending to rebut defendant’s denial of any efforts to remove the snow that had accumulated in front of its lessee’s premises (see Jiuz v City of New York, 244 AD2d 298, 298-299 [1997]). Nor does plaintiff adduce any evidence that defendant created or increased a dangerous condition on the sidewalk (see Gaudino v 511 W 232nd St. Owners Corp., 279 AD2d 272, 273 [2001]). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Sullivan, Gonzalez, Sweeny and Catterson, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

18 A.D.3d 284, 794 N.Y.S.2d 644, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5192, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/almanzar-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack