Bisogno v. 333 Tenants Corp. Co-Op

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bisogno v. 333 Tenants Corp. Co-Op

72 A.D.3d 555, 898 N.Y.S.2d 459

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

DecidedApril 22, 2010

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 72 A.D.3d 555 (Bisogno v. 333 Tenants Corp. Co-Op) 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

Bisogno v. 333 Tenants Corp. Co-Op, 72 A.D.3d 555, 898 N.Y.S.2d 459 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward H. Lehner, J.), entered November 20, 2009, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the [556]*556complaint, deemed an appeal from judgment, same court and Justice, entered December 23, 2009 (CPLR 5501 [c]), and so considered, said judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In opposition to defendants’ prima facie showing that they did not create an unreasonably dangerous condition by placing a pile of Christmas trees near the curb on the sidewalk in front of their building, plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact whether defendants had notice of a tripping hazard that allegedly resulted when the trees were moved by an unknown person or persons some time between their placement on the sidewalk and plaintiff’s fall later that morning (see Gordon v American Museum of Natural History, 67 NY2d 836 [1986]). Concur— Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Acosta, DeGrasse and Richter, JJ.

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

Appeal from order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward H. Lehner, J.), entered November 20, 2009, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the [556]*556complaint, deemed an appeal from judgment, same court and Justice, entered December 23, 2009 (CPLR 5501 [c]), and so considered, said judgment unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In opposition to defendants’ prima facie showing that they did not create an unreasonably dangerous condition by placing a pile of Christmas trees near the curb on the sidewalk in front of their building, plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact whether defendants had notice of a tripping hazard that allegedly resulted when the trees were moved by an unknown person or persons some time between their placement on the sidewalk and plaintiff’s fall later that morning (see Gordon v American Museum of Natural History, 67 NY2d 836 [1986]). Concur— Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Acosta, DeGrasse and Richter, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

72 A.D.3d 555, 898 N.Y.S.2d 459, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bisogno-v-333-tenants-corp-co-op-nyappdiv-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack