Eliassian v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Eliassian v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc.

300 A.D.2d 51, 751 N.Y.S.2d 15, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11719

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

DecidedDecember 5, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 300 A.D.2d 51 (Eliassian v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc.) 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

Eliassian v. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc., 300 A.D.2d 51, 751 N.Y.S.2d 15, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11719 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Saralee Evans, J.), entered on or about March 19, 2002, which, inter alia, denied the cross motion of defendant 46-47 L.L.C. for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was allegedly injured as a consequence of tripping upon a shunt board that had been placed on an area of the sidewalk abutting defendant-appellant 46-47 L.L.C.’s (46-47) premises to cover temporary cables, laid by defendant Consolidated Edison to restore electricity to 46-47’s premises. Inasmuch as there is a triable factual issue as to whether the placement of shunt boards under these circumstances constituted a special use of the sidewalk by 46-47 giving rise to a duty on 46-47’s part to maintain the provisional sidewalk structure, 46-47’s cross motion for summary judgment was properly denied (see Karr v City of New York, 161 AD2d 449). Concur — Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Buckley, Sullivan and Lerner, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Saralee Evans, J.), entered on or about March 19, 2002, which, inter alia, denied the cross motion of defendant 46-47 L.L.C. for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiff was allegedly injured as a consequence of tripping upon a shunt board that had been placed on an area of the sidewalk abutting defendant-appellant 46-47 L.L.C.’s (46-47) premises to cover temporary cables, laid by defendant Consolidated Edison to restore electricity to 46-47’s premises. Inasmuch as there is a triable factual issue as to whether the placement of shunt boards under these circumstances constituted a special use of the sidewalk by 46-47 giving rise to a duty on 46-47’s part to maintain the provisional sidewalk structure, 46-47’s cross motion for summary judgment was properly denied (see Karr v City of New York, 161 AD2d 449). Concur — Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Buckley, Sullivan and Lerner, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

300 A.D.2d 51, 751 N.Y.S.2d 15, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11719, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eliassian-v-consolidated-edison-co-of-new-york-inc-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack