Johnson v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Johnson v. New York City Transit Authority

301 A.D.2d 431, 752 N.Y.S.2d 876, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 297

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

DecidedJanuary 16, 2003

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 301 A.D.2d 431 (Johnson v. New York City Transit Authority) 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

Johnson v. New York City Transit Authority, 301 A.D.2d 431, 752 N.Y.S.2d 876, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 297 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert Lippmann, J.), entered February 15, 2002, which, in an action for personal injuries sustained when plaintiff slipped on a puddle allegedly formed by water dripping from an awning overhanging subway steps, denied motions by defendant Transit Authority and defendant owners of the building to which the awning was attached dismissing the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Assuming the building owners cannot be held liable unless the awning constituted a significant structural defect, an issue of fact exists in that regard raised by the location of the awning relative to the subway steps (see Abreu v Nokit Realty Corp., 288 AD2d 26). Issues of fact also exist as to, inter alia, whether the puddle on the steps was caused by water dripping from the awning and whether defendants had notice of the alleged dangerous propensity of the awning to drip water onto the steps. Concur — Andrias, J.P., Buckley, Williams, Lerner and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert Lippmann, J.), entered February 15, 2002, which, in an action for personal injuries sustained when plaintiff slipped on a puddle allegedly formed by water dripping from an awning overhanging subway steps, denied motions by defendant Transit Authority and defendant owners of the building to which the awning was attached dismissing the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Assuming the building owners cannot be held liable unless the awning constituted a significant structural defect, an issue of fact exists in that regard raised by the location of the awning relative to the subway steps (see Abreu v Nokit Realty Corp., 288 AD2d 26). Issues of fact also exist as to, inter alia, whether the puddle on the steps was caused by water dripping from the awning and whether defendants had notice of the alleged dangerous propensity of the awning to drip water onto the steps. Concur — Andrias, J.P., Buckley, Williams, Lerner and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

301 A.D.2d 431, 752 N.Y.S.2d 876, 2003 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 297, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-new-york-city-transit-authority-nyappdiv-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack