Hooker v. Melton Manor Condominium

212 A.D.2d 1049, 623 N.Y.S.2d 43, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1937
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 3, 1995·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—Order unanimously [1050]*1050reversed on the law without costs, motion granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: Plaintiffs failed to raise a question of fact whether defendant had actual or constructive notice of a hazardous condition on the marble steps where plaintiff Robert Hooker fell. "[A] 'general awareness’ that a dangerous condition may be present is legally insufficient to constitute notice of the particular condition that caused plaintiff’s fall” (Piacquadio v Recine Realty Corp., 84 NY2d 967, 969, quoting Gordon v American Museum of Natural History, 67 NY2d 836, 838). Thus, Supreme Court erred in denying defendant’s summary judgment motion. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Glownia, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Pine, J. P., Lawton, Fallon, Wesley and Davis, JJ.

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

Hooker v. Melton Manor Condominium, 212 A.D.2d 1049, 623 N.Y.S.2d 43, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1937 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

212 A.D.2d 1049 (Hooker v. Melton Manor Condominium) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lupi v. Home Creators, Inc.
265 A.D.2d 653 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)