Gigliotti v. St. Stanislaus Kostka Roman Catholic Church

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gigliotti v. St. Stanislaus Kostka Roman Catholic Church

261 A.D.2d 951, 689 N.Y.S.2d 806, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5058

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

DecidedMay 7, 1999

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 261 A.D.2d 951 (Gigliotti v. St. Stanislaus Kostka Roman Catholic Church) 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

Gigliotti v. St. Stanislaus Kostka Roman Catholic Church, 261 A.D.2d 951, 689 N.Y.S.2d 806, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5058 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in denying defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Plaintiff Mary Gigliotti seeks to recover damages for injuries she sustained when she tripped and fell over a defect in the concrete driveway of defendant church. The defect consisted of a five-eighths-inch deviation in the height of two adjoining concrete slabs. Such a [952]*952small defect is not actionable unless it has the characteristics of a trap, snare or nuisance (see, Tesak v Marine Midland Bank, 254 AD2d 717). Defendants met their initial burden, and plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact whether the alleged defect has the characteristics of a trap, snare or nuisance (cf., Durr v New York Cent. & Hudson Riv. R. R. Co., 184 NY 320, 324-325; Tesak v Marine Midland Bank, supra). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Koshian, J.— Summary Judgment.) Present — Green, J. P., Hayes, Wisner, Pigott, Jr., and Scudder 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 granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in denying defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Plaintiff Mary Gigliotti seeks to recover damages for injuries she sustained when she tripped and fell over a defect in the concrete driveway of defendant church. The defect consisted of a five-eighths-inch deviation in the height of two adjoining concrete slabs. Such a [952]*952small defect is not actionable unless it has the characteristics of a trap, snare or nuisance (see, Tesak v Marine Midland Bank, 254 AD2d 717). Defendants met their initial burden, and plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact whether the alleged defect has the characteristics of a trap, snare or nuisance (cf., Durr v New York Cent. & Hudson Riv. R. R. Co., 184 NY 320, 324-325; Tesak v Marine Midland Bank, supra). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Koshian, J.— Summary Judgment.) Present — Green, J. P., Hayes, Wisner, Pigott, Jr., and Scudder JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

261 A.D.2d 951, 689 N.Y.S.2d 806, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5058, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gigliotti-v-st-stanislaus-kostka-roman-catholic-church-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack