Lausell v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lausell v. City of New York

2017 NY Slip Op 7407, 154 A.D.3d 586, 62 N.Y.S.3d 269, 2017 WL 4781736

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

DecidedOctober 24, 2017

Docket4785 309846/10

StatusPublished

This text of 2017 NY Slip Op 7407 (Lausell v. City of New York) 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

Lausell v. City of New York, 2017 NY Slip Op 7407, 154 A.D.3d 586, 62 N.Y.S.3d 269, 2017 WL 4781736 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Elizabeth A. Taylor, J.), entered July 20, 2016, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendants sustained their initial burden through the testimony and affidavit of the building manager, plaintiff, the assistant principal, and plaintiff’s daughter, as well as with the log book entries, which demonstrated that there was a path that was cleared of snow and ice at the crosswalk and on the sidewalk in front of the Marion Avenue entrance to the building; and that the building manager had inspected the area where plaintiff fell 80 minutes before her accident and it was free of snow and ice (see Herrera v E. 103rd St. & Lexington Ave. Realty Corp., 95 AD3d 463 [1st Dept 2012]).

The court properly found that plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact concerning defendants’ notice of the hazardous condition and as to defendants’ negligence (see McKenzie v City of New York, 116 AD3d 526, 527 [1st Dept 2014]). Even if plaintiff’s testimony that she did not climb over a mound of snow to access the sidewalk on Webster Avenue was accepted, despite the contrary testimony by the assistant principal and plaintiff’s daughter, it was undisputed that plaintiff nevertheless elected to cross the street mid-block, wearing sneakers, and ignored the clear crosswalk and path on Marion Avenue (see Zayas v New York City Hous. Auth., 115 AD3d 485 [1st Dept 2014]).

Concur — Renwick, J.R, Kapnick, Gesmer and Kern, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Elizabeth A. Taylor, J.), entered July 20, 2016, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendants sustained their initial burden through the testimony and affidavit of the building manager, plaintiff, the assistant principal, and plaintiff’s daughter, as well as with the log book entries, which demonstrated that there was a path that was cleared of snow and ice at the crosswalk and on the sidewalk in front of the Marion Avenue entrance to the building; and that the building manager had inspected the area where plaintiff fell 80 minutes before her accident and it was free of snow and ice (see Herrera v E. 103rd St. & Lexington Ave. Realty Corp., 95 AD3d 463 [1st Dept 2012]).

The court properly found that plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact concerning defendants’ notice of the hazardous condition and as to defendants’ negligence (see McKenzie v City of New York, 116 AD3d 526, 527 [1st Dept 2014]). Even if plaintiff’s testimony that she did not climb over a mound of snow to access the sidewalk on Webster Avenue was accepted, despite the contrary testimony by the assistant principal and plaintiff’s daughter, it was undisputed that plaintiff nevertheless elected to cross the street mid-block, wearing sneakers, and ignored the clear crosswalk and path on Marion Avenue (see Zayas v New York City Hous. Auth., 115 AD3d 485 [1st Dept 2014]).

Concur — Renwick, J.R, Kapnick, Gesmer and Kern, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2017 NY Slip Op 7407, 154 A.D.3d 586, 62 N.Y.S.3d 269, 2017 WL 4781736, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lausell-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack