Calderon v. Noonan Towers Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Calderon v. Noonan Towers Co.

33 A.D.3d 495, 823 N.Y.S.2d 135

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

DecidedOctober 24, 2006

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 33 A.D.3d 495 (Calderon v. Noonan Towers Co.) 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

Calderon v. Noonan Towers Co., 33 A.D.3d 495, 823 N.Y.S.2d 135 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Norma Ruiz, J.), entered January 11, 2006, which denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was allegedly injured when she fell after catching [496]*496her heel in a cracked or broken portion of the threshold to the vestibule of defendants’ building. A triable issue of facts exists regarding whether the alleged defective condition is actionable (see Trincere v County of Suffolk, 90 NY2d 976 [1997]). Questions of fact were also raised, from the photographs and defendants’ superintendent’s deposition testimony, as to whether defendants had constructive notice of the defect (see Taylor v New York City Tr. Auth., 48 NY2d 903 [1979]; see also Batton v Elghanayan, 43 NY2d 898 [1978]). Concur—Buckley, EJ., Tom, Saxe, Sullivan and McGuire, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Norma Ruiz, J.), entered January 11, 2006, which denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was allegedly injured when she fell after catching [496]*496her heel in a cracked or broken portion of the threshold to the vestibule of defendants’ building. A triable issue of facts exists regarding whether the alleged defective condition is actionable (see Trincere v County of Suffolk, 90 NY2d 976 [1997]). Questions of fact were also raised, from the photographs and defendants’ superintendent’s deposition testimony, as to whether defendants had constructive notice of the defect (see Taylor v New York City Tr. Auth., 48 NY2d 903 [1979]; see also Batton v Elghanayan, 43 NY2d 898 [1978]). Concur—Buckley, EJ., Tom, Saxe, Sullivan and McGuire, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

33 A.D.3d 495, 823 N.Y.S.2d 135, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/calderon-v-noonan-towers-co-nyappdiv-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack