Knight v. New York City Transit Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Knight v. New York City Transit Authority

268 A.D.2d 238, 700 N.Y.S.2d 686, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 60

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

DecidedJanuary 6, 2000

StatusPublished

This text of 268 A.D.2d 238 (Knight 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

Knight v. New York City Transit Authority, 268 A.D.2d 238, 700 N.Y.S.2d 686, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 60 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert Lippmann, J.), entered October 16, 1998, which, in an action for personal injuries sustained in a slip and fall on a stairway in defendant’s subway station, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

No issue of fact has been sufficiently raised as to whether defendant had notice of a piece of debris that allegedly caused plaintiff to fall down the stairway (see, Gordon v American Museum of Natural History, 67 NY2d 836, 837-838). Nor does plaintiff show a substantial likelihood that information material and necessary to the issue of constructive notice will be provided by any discovery still outstanding (see, Zollner v City of New York, 204 AD2d 626, 627). Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Ellerin, Saxe and Buckley, 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 October 16, 1998, which, in an action for personal injuries sustained in a slip and fall on a stairway in defendant’s subway station, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

No issue of fact has been sufficiently raised as to whether defendant had notice of a piece of debris that allegedly caused plaintiff to fall down the stairway (see, Gordon v American Museum of Natural History, 67 NY2d 836, 837-838). Nor does plaintiff show a substantial likelihood that information material and necessary to the issue of constructive notice will be provided by any discovery still outstanding (see, Zollner v City of New York, 204 AD2d 626, 627). Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Nardelli, Ellerin, Saxe and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

268 A.D.2d 238, 700 N.Y.S.2d 686, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 60, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/knight-v-new-york-city-transit-authority-nyappdiv-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack