Fischer v. Three Deli, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Fischer v. Three Deli, Inc.

247 A.D.2d 271, 667 N.Y.S.2d 904, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1411

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

DecidedFebruary 17, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 247 A.D.2d 271 (Fischer v. Three Deli, 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

Fischer v. Three Deli, Inc., 247 A.D.2d 271, 667 N.Y.S.2d 904, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1411 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.), entered June 4, 1996, which granted defendants-respondents’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion was properly granted on the ground that plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact as to whether defendants, owners and managing agent of the building in front of which plaintiff slipped and fell, were in possession of the store in front of which plaintiff slipped and fell, or had actual or constructive notice of the allegedly dangerous mat in front of that store and on which plaintiff slipped and fell (see, Piacquadio v Recine Realty Corp., 84 NY2d 967).

Concur — Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Williams and Tom, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.), entered June 4, 1996, which granted defendants-respondents’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion was properly granted on the ground that plaintiff failed to raise an issue of fact as to whether defendants, owners and managing agent of the building in front of which plaintiff slipped and fell, were in possession of the store in front of which plaintiff slipped and fell, or had actual or constructive notice of the allegedly dangerous mat in front of that store and on which plaintiff slipped and fell (see, Piacquadio v Recine Realty Corp., 84 NY2d 967).

Concur — Milonas, J. P., Ellerin, Williams and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

247 A.D.2d 271, 667 N.Y.S.2d 904, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1411, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fischer-v-three-deli-inc-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack