Chizh v. Hillside Campus Meadows Associates, LLC

New York Court of Appeals

Chizh v. Hillside Campus Meadows Associates, LLC

817 N.E.2d 819, 3 N.Y.3d 664, 784 N.Y.S.2d 2, 2004 N.Y. LEXIS 2131

CourtNew York Court of Appeals

DecidedAugust 31, 2004

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 817 N.E.2d 819 (Chizh v. Hillside Campus Meadows Associates, LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Chizh v. Hillside Campus Meadows Associates, LLC, 817 N.E.2d 819, 3 N.Y.3d 664, 784 N.Y.S.2d 2, 2004 N.Y. LEXIS 2131 (N.Y. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.

Unlike the situation in Prats v Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J. (100 NY2d 878 [2003]), here plaintiff was replacing a torn window screen at the time of his injury, an activity that constituted “routine maintenance” rather than “repair” or “alteration” of a building or structure (see Esposito v New York City Indus. Dev. Agency, 1 NY3d 526 [2003]; see also Abbatiello v Lancaster Studio Assoc., 3 NY3d 46, 53 [2004]).

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges G.B. Smith, Ciparick, Rosenblatt, Graffeo, Read and R.S. Smith concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.

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