Dudley v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Dudley v. City of New York

261 A.D.2d 504, 688 N.Y.S.2d 904, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5413

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

DecidedMay 17, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 261 A.D.2d 504 (Dudley 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

Dudley v. City of New York, 261 A.D.2d 504, 688 N.Y.S.2d 904, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5413 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.), dated April 29, 1998, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant established its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. In opposition, the plaintiff failed to prove prior written notice of the alleged defective sidewalk condition pursuant to Administrative Code of the City of New York § 7-201 (c) (2). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment (see, Almodovar v City of New York, 240 AD2d 523).

The plaintiff’s remaining contentions are without merit. Ritter, J. P., Joy, Altman and Smith, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Hutcherson, J.), dated April 29, 1998, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant established its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law. In opposition, the plaintiff failed to prove prior written notice of the alleged defective sidewalk condition pursuant to Administrative Code of the City of New York § 7-201 (c) (2). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment (see, Almodovar v City of New York, 240 AD2d 523).

The plaintiff’s remaining contentions are without merit. Ritter, J. P., Joy, Altman and Smith, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 A.D.2d 504, 688 N.Y.S.2d 904, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5413, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dudley-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack