Gloth v. Brusco Equities, LLC, Inc.

1 A.D.2d 294, 767 N.Y.S.2d 593, 1 A.D.3d 294, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12538
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 25, 2003·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Harold Beeler, J), entered January 2, 2003, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

There is no evidence that defendants had actual or constructive notice of the defective condition that caused plaintiff’s injury (see Juarez v Wavecrest Mgt. Team, 88 NY2d 628, 646 [1996]). The court properly disregarded plaintiffs affidavit on the issue of notice since it contradicted his prior deposition testimony and was clearly tailored to create an issue of fact (Phillips v Bronx Lebanon Hosp., 268 AD2d 318, 320 [2000]). Concur — Nardelli, J.P, Andrias, Rosenberger and Friedman, JJ.

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

Gloth v. Brusco Equities, LLC, Inc., 1 A.D.2d 294, 767 N.Y.S.2d 593, 1 A.D.3d 294, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12538 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

1 A.D.2d 294 (Gloth v. Brusco Equities, LLC, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Quach v. C&A Jerome Realty, LLC
2025 NY Slip Op 06293 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2025)
Branham v. Loews Orpheum Cinemas, Inc.
31 A.D.3d 319 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Machado v. Clinton Housing Development Co.
20 A.D.3d 307 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)