Fine v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fine v. City of New York

303 A.D.2d 306, 755 N.Y.S.2d 843, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3062

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

DecidedMarch 25, 2003

StatusPublished

This text of 303 A.D.2d 306 (Fine 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

Fine v. City of New York, 303 A.D.2d 306, 755 N.Y.S.2d 843, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3062 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Saralee Evans, J.), entered January 18, 2002, which denied defendant Asti’s motion and the cross motions of defendants 13 East 12th and City of New York for summary judgment to dismiss the complaint and all cross claims in this trip-and-fall personal injury case, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion and cross motions for summary judgment granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims.

While there is no “minimal dimension test,” in this case the defect should have been found to be trivial and nonactionable as a matter of law, and the complaint should have been dismissed (Trincere v County of Suffolk, 90 NY2d 976, 977 [1997]). Plaintiffs contention that defendants 13 East 12th and Asti made special use of the sidewalk near the site of decedent’s injury is inapposite, since the alleged special use was not shown to be connected in any way to the trip and fall. Concur— Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Ellerin, Williams and Marlow, 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 January 18, 2002, which denied defendant Asti’s motion and the cross motions of defendants 13 East 12th and City of New York for summary judgment to dismiss the complaint and all cross claims in this trip-and-fall personal injury case, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion and cross motions for summary judgment granted. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment dismissing the complaint and all cross claims.

While there is no “minimal dimension test,” in this case the defect should have been found to be trivial and nonactionable as a matter of law, and the complaint should have been dismissed (Trincere v County of Suffolk, 90 NY2d 976, 977 [1997]). Plaintiffs contention that defendants 13 East 12th and Asti made special use of the sidewalk near the site of decedent’s injury is inapposite, since the alleged special use was not shown to be connected in any way to the trip and fall. Concur— Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Ellerin, Williams and Marlow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

303 A.D.2d 306, 755 N.Y.S.2d 843, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3062, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fine-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack