Baquero v. Youngs Memorial Cemetery, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Baquero v. Youngs Memorial Cemetery, Inc.

248 A.D.2d 497, 669 N.Y.S.2d 887, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2627

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

DecidedMarch 16, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 248 A.D.2d 497 (Baquero v. Youngs Memorial Cemetery, Inc.) 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

Baquero v. Youngs Memorial Cemetery, Inc., 248 A.D.2d 497, 669 N.Y.S.2d 887, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2627 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Connell, J.), dated February 13, 1997, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the defendant’s contentions, the deposition [498]*498testimony of the plaintiff Javier Baquero was sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to the existence of a defective condition on the defendant’s property which allegedly caused his fall (see, Romano v Westbury Prop. Inv. Co., 240 AD2d 388; Farrar v Teicholz, 173 AD2d 674). The plaintiffs also submitted evidence raising an issue of fact as to whether the defendant had actual or constructive notice of the alleged defect (see, Gordon v American Museum of Natural History, 67 NY2d 836; Romano v Westbury Prop. Inv. Co., supra; Ferlito v Great S. Bay Assocs., 140 AD2d 408).

We decline to reach the defendant’s remaining contention, as it is raised for the first time on appeal (see, Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. v Bieder, 212 AD2d 693; Miller Org. v Vasap Constr. Corp., 184 AD2d 763).

Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Copertino and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Connell, J.), dated February 13, 1997, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the defendant’s contentions, the deposition [498]*498testimony of the plaintiff Javier Baquero was sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact as to the existence of a defective condition on the defendant’s property which allegedly caused his fall (see, Romano v Westbury Prop. Inv. Co., 240 AD2d 388; Farrar v Teicholz, 173 AD2d 674). The plaintiffs also submitted evidence raising an issue of fact as to whether the defendant had actual or constructive notice of the alleged defect (see, Gordon v American Museum of Natural History, 67 NY2d 836; Romano v Westbury Prop. Inv. Co., supra; Ferlito v Great S. Bay Assocs., 140 AD2d 408).

We decline to reach the defendant’s remaining contention, as it is raised for the first time on appeal (see, Matter of Allstate Ins. Co. v Bieder, 212 AD2d 693; Miller Org. v Vasap Constr. Corp., 184 AD2d 763).

Rosenblatt, J. P., Ritter, Copertino and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

248 A.D.2d 497, 669 N.Y.S.2d 887, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2627, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baquero-v-youngs-memorial-cemetery-inc-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack