Fiordalisi v. Town of Huntington

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fiordalisi v. Town of Huntington

275 A.D.2d 299, 712 N.Y.S.2d 403, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8564

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

DecidedAugust 7, 2000

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 275 A.D.2d 299 (Fiordalisi v. Town of Huntington) 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

Fiordalisi v. Town of Huntington, 275 A.D.2d 299, 712 N.Y.S.2d 403, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8564 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Underwood, J.), dated June 30, 1999, which granted the defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) to dismiss the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant, Town of Huntington, established that it did not have prior written notice of the alleged defect that caused the injured plaintiff to fall (see, Town Law § 65-a; Code of Town of Huntington § 173-18). Moreover, the record is devoid of any evidence that the Town affirmatively created the alleged defect. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the Town’s motion to dismiss the complaint (see, Ende v Town of Orangetown, 236 AD2d 438; Curci v City of New York, 209 AD2d 574; Goldston v Town of Babylon, 145 AD2d 534). O’Brien, J. P., Altman, Friedmann, McGinity 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, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Underwood, J.), dated June 30, 1999, which granted the defendant’s motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) to dismiss the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant, Town of Huntington, established that it did not have prior written notice of the alleged defect that caused the injured plaintiff to fall (see, Town Law § 65-a; Code of Town of Huntington § 173-18). Moreover, the record is devoid of any evidence that the Town affirmatively created the alleged defect. Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the Town’s motion to dismiss the complaint (see, Ende v Town of Orangetown, 236 AD2d 438; Curci v City of New York, 209 AD2d 574; Goldston v Town of Babylon, 145 AD2d 534). O’Brien, J. P., Altman, Friedmann, McGinity and Smith, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

275 A.D.2d 299, 712 N.Y.S.2d 403, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8564, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fiordalisi-v-town-of-huntington-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack