Davies v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Davies v. City of New York

39 A.D.3d 390, 836 N.Y.S.2d 16

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

DecidedApril 24, 2007

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 39 A.D.3d 390 (Davies v. City of New York) 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

Davies v. City of New York, 39 A.D.3d 390, 836 N.Y.S.2d 16 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Mary Ann Brigantti-Hughes, J.), entered February 4, 2005, which, insofar as appealed from, denied defendant-appellant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

Plaintiff s claim that appellant created the slippery condition of the floor on which plaintiff slipped by excessive waxing rests only on her observation that the floor was “shiny.” Such evidence, without more, does not permit an inference of negligent waxing (Caran v Hilton Hotels Corp., 299 AD2d 252 [2002], lv dismissed 3 NY3d 693 [2004]). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Marlow, Sullivan, Gonzalez and Kavanagh, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Mary Ann Brigantti-Hughes, J.), entered February 4, 2005, which, insofar as appealed from, denied defendant-appellant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly.

Plaintiff s claim that appellant created the slippery condition of the floor on which plaintiff slipped by excessive waxing rests only on her observation that the floor was “shiny.” Such evidence, without more, does not permit an inference of negligent waxing (Caran v Hilton Hotels Corp., 299 AD2d 252 [2002], lv dismissed 3 NY3d 693 [2004]). Concur—Andrias, J.P., Marlow, Sullivan, Gonzalez and Kavanagh, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 A.D.3d 390, 836 N.Y.S.2d 16, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davies-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack