Gerson v. Brigham Park Cooperative Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gerson v. Brigham Park Cooperative Corp.

278 A.D.2d 273, 718 N.Y.S.2d 211, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12953

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

DecidedDecember 11, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 278 A.D.2d 273 (Gerson v. Brigham Park Cooperative 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

Gerson v. Brigham Park Cooperative Corp., 278 A.D.2d 273, 718 N.Y.S.2d 211, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12953 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for wrongful death and conscious [274]*274pain and suffering, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Price, J.), dated December 21, 1999, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the defendants’ contention, the Supreme Court correctly found that there is an issue of fact as to whether they had notice of the alleged dangerous condition which caused the decedent’s fall (see, Osorio v Wendell Terrace Owners Corp., 276 AD2d 540; McLaughlan v Waldbaums, Inc., 237 AD2d 335; Lande v New York City Bd. ofEduc., 222 AD2d 656; Columbo v James River, II, Inc., 197 AD2d 760). Accordingly, the defendants’ motion for summary judgment was properly denied. O’Brien, J. P., Sullivan, Krausman, Goldstein and Schmidt, 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 wrongful death and conscious [274]*274pain and suffering, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Price, J.), dated December 21, 1999, which denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the defendants’ contention, the Supreme Court correctly found that there is an issue of fact as to whether they had notice of the alleged dangerous condition which caused the decedent’s fall (see, Osorio v Wendell Terrace Owners Corp., 276 AD2d 540; McLaughlan v Waldbaums, Inc., 237 AD2d 335; Lande v New York City Bd. ofEduc., 222 AD2d 656; Columbo v James River, II, Inc., 197 AD2d 760). Accordingly, the defendants’ motion for summary judgment was properly denied. O’Brien, J. P., Sullivan, Krausman, Goldstein and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

278 A.D.2d 273, 718 N.Y.S.2d 211, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12953, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gerson-v-brigham-park-cooperative-corp-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack