Bouton v. City of Newburgh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Bouton v. City of Newburgh

113 A.D.3d 715, 978 N.Y.2d 870

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

DecidedJanuary 22, 2014

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 113 A.D.3d 715 (Bouton v. City of Newburgh) 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

Bouton v. City of Newburgh, 113 A.D.3d 715, 978 N.Y.2d 870 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

The defendant City of Newburgh and the defendant T.M. Brennan Contractors, Inc. (hereinafter together the movants), each made a prima facie showing of their entitlement to judg[716]*716ment as a matter of law dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them. The movants submitted evidentiary proof, including a transcript of the testimony given by the plaintiff at a hearing held pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-h, a transcript of the plaintiffs deposition testimony, and photographs of the accident site, that established that the condition which caused the subject accident was open and obvious, and not inherently dangerous (see Soussi v Gobin, 87 AD3d 580, 580-581 [2011]; Capasso v Village of Goshen, 84 AD3d 998 [2011]; Orlando v Audax Constr. Corp., 14 AD3d 500 [2005]; Fernandez v Edlund, 31 AD3d 601 [2006]). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted those branches of the movants’ respective motions which were for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against each of them.

In light of the foregoing, we need not reach the plaintiff’s remaining contentions. Skelos, J.P., Dickerson, Cohen and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur.

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

The defendant City of Newburgh and the defendant T.M. Brennan Contractors, Inc. (hereinafter together the movants), each made a prima facie showing of their entitlement to judg[716]*716ment as a matter of law dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against them. The movants submitted evidentiary proof, including a transcript of the testimony given by the plaintiff at a hearing held pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-h, a transcript of the plaintiffs deposition testimony, and photographs of the accident site, that established that the condition which caused the subject accident was open and obvious, and not inherently dangerous (see Soussi v Gobin, 87 AD3d 580, 580-581 [2011]; Capasso v Village of Goshen, 84 AD3d 998 [2011]; Orlando v Audax Constr. Corp., 14 AD3d 500 [2005]; Fernandez v Edlund, 31 AD3d 601 [2006]). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted those branches of the movants’ respective motions which were for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against each of them.

In light of the foregoing, we need not reach the plaintiff’s remaining contentions. Skelos, J.P., Dickerson, Cohen and Hinds-Radix, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

113 A.D.3d 715, 978 N.Y.2d 870, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bouton-v-city-of-newburgh-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack