Foley v. Exolon-Esk Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Foley v. Exolon-Esk Corp.

261 A.D.2d 835, 689 N.Y.S.2d 572, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4862

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

DecidedMay 7, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 261 A.D.2d 835 (Foley v. Exolon-Esk Corp.) 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

Foley v. Exolon-Esk Corp., 261 A.D.2d 835, 689 N.Y.S.2d 572, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4862 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion denied and complaint reinstated. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Plaintiffs’ submissions in opposition to defendant’s motion raised an issue of fact whether the presence of a greasy substance on defendant’s loading dock was a dangerous condition that occurred at regular intervals so as to constitute constructive notice (see, Morales v Jolee Consolidators, 173 AD2d 315; Weisenthal v Pickman, 153 AD2d 849, 851). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Michalek, J.— Summary Judgment.) Present — Pine, J. P., Wisner, Hurlbutt, Scudder and Callahan, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion denied and complaint reinstated. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Plaintiffs’ submissions in opposition to defendant’s motion raised an issue of fact whether the presence of a greasy substance on defendant’s loading dock was a dangerous condition that occurred at regular intervals so as to constitute constructive notice (see, Morales v Jolee Consolidators, 173 AD2d 315; Weisenthal v Pickman, 153 AD2d 849, 851). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Michalek, J.— Summary Judgment.) Present — Pine, J. P., Wisner, Hurlbutt, Scudder and Callahan, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 A.D.2d 835, 689 N.Y.S.2d 572, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4862, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/foley-v-exolon-esk-corp-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack