Gentile v. University of Rochester Medical Center

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gentile v. University of Rochester Medical Center

292 A.D.2d 874, 739 N.Y.S.2d 330, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2702

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

DecidedMarch 15, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 292 A.D.2d 874 (Gentile v. University of Rochester Medical Center) 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

Gentile v. University of Rochester Medical Center, 292 A.D.2d 874, 739 N.Y.S.2d 330, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2702 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Livingston County (Cicoria, J.), entered April 9, 2001, which denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment.

[875]*875It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed with costs.

Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this negligence action seeking damages for injuries that she sustained when she slipped and fell in the lobby of defendant medical center. Supreme Court properly denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Defendant failed to meet its initial burden of establishing as a matter of law that it did not create the allegedly dangerous condition and lacked actual or constructive notice of its existence (see, Atkinson v Golub Corp. Co., 278 AD2d 905, 905-906; Steenwerth v United Ref. Co. of Pa., 273 AD2d 878; Tenebruso v Toys “R” Us—NYTEX, 256 AD2d 1236, 1237). Because defendant failed to meet its initial burden, we do not address the sufficiency of plaintiffs showing in opposition to the motion (see, Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324; Frank v Price Chopper Operating Co., 275 AD2d 940, 941; Joyes v Buffalo Waterfront Rest. Corp., 262 AD2d 1019, 1019-1020). Present — Wisner, J.P., Scudder, Kehoe, Burns and Gorski, JJ.

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

Appeal from an order of Supreme Court, Livingston County (Cicoria, J.), entered April 9, 2001, which denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment.

[875]*875It is hereby ordered that the order so appealed from be and the same hereby is unanimously affirmed with costs.

Memorandum: Plaintiff commenced this negligence action seeking damages for injuries that she sustained when she slipped and fell in the lobby of defendant medical center. Supreme Court properly denied defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Defendant failed to meet its initial burden of establishing as a matter of law that it did not create the allegedly dangerous condition and lacked actual or constructive notice of its existence (see, Atkinson v Golub Corp. Co., 278 AD2d 905, 905-906; Steenwerth v United Ref. Co. of Pa., 273 AD2d 878; Tenebruso v Toys “R” Us—NYTEX, 256 AD2d 1236, 1237). Because defendant failed to meet its initial burden, we do not address the sufficiency of plaintiffs showing in opposition to the motion (see, Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324; Frank v Price Chopper Operating Co., 275 AD2d 940, 941; Joyes v Buffalo Waterfront Rest. Corp., 262 AD2d 1019, 1019-1020). Present — Wisner, J.P., Scudder, Kehoe, Burns and Gorski, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

292 A.D.2d 874, 739 N.Y.S.2d 330, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2702, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gentile-v-university-of-rochester-medical-center-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack