Bradley v. HWA 1290 III LLC

Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors

Bradley v. HWA 1290 III LLC

111 N.E.3d 322, 86 N.Y.S.3d 428, 32 N.Y.3d 1010

CourtCourt for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors

DecidedOctober 16, 2018

DocketNo. 144 SSM 19

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 111 N.E.3d 322 (Bradley v. HWA 1290 III LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court for the Trial of Impeachments and Correction of Errors primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bradley v. HWA 1290 III LLC, 111 N.E.3d 322, 86 N.Y.S.3d 428, 32 N.Y.3d 1010 (N.Y. Super. Ct. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

***1011On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals ( 22 NYCRR 500.11 ), order affirmed, with costs. To the extent that a violation of standards of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) constitutes evidence of negligence (see Sawyer v. Dreis & Krump Mfg. Co. , 67 N.Y.2d 328, 502 N.Y.S.2d 696, 493 N.E.2d 920 [1986] ; Trimarco v. Klein, 56 N.Y.2d 98, 451 N.Y.S.2d 52, 436 N.E.2d 502 [1982] ), plaintiffs' reliance on those standards was proper. However, plaintiffs nevertheless failed to raise a triable question of fact as to whether defendants had either actual or constructive notice of the alleged dangerous condition.

Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Rivera, Stein, Fahey, Wilson and Feinman concur. Judge Garcia took no part.

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

***1011On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals ( 22 NYCRR 500.11 ), order affirmed, with costs. To the extent that a violation of standards of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) constitutes evidence of negligence (see Sawyer v. Dreis & Krump Mfg. Co. , 67 N.Y.2d 328, 502 N.Y.S.2d 696, 493 N.E.2d 920 [1986] ; Trimarco v. Klein, 56 N.Y.2d 98, 451 N.Y.S.2d 52, 436 N.E.2d 502 [1982] ), plaintiffs' reliance on those standards was proper. However, plaintiffs nevertheless failed to raise a triable question of fact as to whether defendants had either actual or constructive notice of the alleged dangerous condition.

Chief Judge DiFiore and Judges Rivera, Stein, Fahey, Wilson and Feinman concur. Judge Garcia took no part.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

111 N.E.3d 322, 86 N.Y.S.3d 428, 32 N.Y.3d 1010, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bradley-v-hwa-1290-iii-llc-nycterr-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack