Beplat v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Beplat v. City of New York

246 A.D.2d 471, 668 N.Y.S.2d 382, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 629

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

DecidedJanuary 27, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 246 A.D.2d 471 (Beplat 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

Beplat v. City of New York, 246 A.D.2d 471, 668 N.Y.S.2d 382, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 629 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Phyllis Gangel-Jacob, J.), entered on or about October 24, 1996, which denied defendants-appellants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

It is of no moment that the prior owners, and not defendants, the present owners of the building abutting the sidewalk where the fuel oil intake valve over which plaintiff tripped is located, installed the valve in the sidewalk and that defendants have never made use of it. It is the capability of use rather than the actual use that creates liability on the basis of the abutting owner’s special use (Lombardozzi v City of New York, 71 Misc 2d 271, 272-273). Issues of fact exist as to whether the valve, which protruded two inches above the sidewalk and was filled with cement at the time of the accident, constituted a dangerous condition .on the sidewalk. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Tom and Andrias, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Phyllis Gangel-Jacob, J.), entered on or about October 24, 1996, which denied defendants-appellants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

It is of no moment that the prior owners, and not defendants, the present owners of the building abutting the sidewalk where the fuel oil intake valve over which plaintiff tripped is located, installed the valve in the sidewalk and that defendants have never made use of it. It is the capability of use rather than the actual use that creates liability on the basis of the abutting owner’s special use (Lombardozzi v City of New York, 71 Misc 2d 271, 272-273). Issues of fact exist as to whether the valve, which protruded two inches above the sidewalk and was filled with cement at the time of the accident, constituted a dangerous condition .on the sidewalk. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Tom and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

246 A.D.2d 471, 668 N.Y.S.2d 382, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 629, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beplat-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack