Berlowitz v. Town of Brighton

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Berlowitz v. Town of Brighton

259 A.D.2d 983, 688 N.Y.S.2d 859, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3320

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

DecidedMarch 31, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 259 A.D.2d 983 (Berlowitz v. Town of Brighton) 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

Berlowitz v. Town of Brighton, 259 A.D.2d 983, 688 N.Y.S.2d 859, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3320 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted the motion of defendant, the Town of Brighton (Town), for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Myra N. Berlowitz (plaintiff) sustained injuries on October 11,1995, when she fell on a cracked sidewalk in front of 203 Esplanade Drive in the Town of Brighton. Plaintiffs concede that the Town sustained its burden of demonstrating that it had not received prior written notice of the defect as required by Town Law § 65-a (2) and Brighton Town Code § 166-1. Plaintiffs failed to submit proof in evidentiary form to raise an issue of fact whether the Town created the defective condition (see, Gutierrez v Cohen, 227 AD2d 447, 448; Kaempf v Town of Hempstead, 170 AD2d 652). Contrary to plaintiffs’ contention, the fact that the Town “might have had actual or constructive notice of the defect is not a substitute for compliance with the statute” (Deans v City of Buffalo, 181 AD2d 1015; see also, Amabile v City of Buffalo, 251 AD2d 967, lv granted 92 NY2d 813). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Siracuse, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Denman, P. J., Law-ton, Hayes, Pigott, Jr., and Scudder, JJ.

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

Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted the motion of defendant, the Town of Brighton (Town), for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Myra N. Berlowitz (plaintiff) sustained injuries on October 11,1995, when she fell on a cracked sidewalk in front of 203 Esplanade Drive in the Town of Brighton. Plaintiffs concede that the Town sustained its burden of demonstrating that it had not received prior written notice of the defect as required by Town Law § 65-a (2) and Brighton Town Code § 166-1. Plaintiffs failed to submit proof in evidentiary form to raise an issue of fact whether the Town created the defective condition (see, Gutierrez v Cohen, 227 AD2d 447, 448; Kaempf v Town of Hempstead, 170 AD2d 652). Contrary to plaintiffs’ contention, the fact that the Town “might have had actual or constructive notice of the defect is not a substitute for compliance with the statute” (Deans v City of Buffalo, 181 AD2d 1015; see also, Amabile v City of Buffalo, 251 AD2d 967, lv granted 92 NY2d 813). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Monroe County, Siracuse, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Denman, P. J., Law-ton, Hayes, Pigott, Jr., and Scudder, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

259 A.D.2d 983, 688 N.Y.S.2d 859, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3320, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/berlowitz-v-town-of-brighton-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack