Lee v. State

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lee v. State

16 A.D.3d 627, 791 N.Y.S.2d 440

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

DecidedMarch 28, 2005

DocketClaim No. 106014

StatusPublished

This text of 16 A.D.3d 627 (Lee v. State) 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

Lee v. State, 16 A.D.3d 627, 791 N.Y.S.2d 440 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

In a claim to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the claimants appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims (Lack, J.), dated September 2, 2003, which, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the claim.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The claimant Dorothy Lee allegedly tripped and fell over a raised slab of cement in a parking lot owned by the defendant, thereby sustaining personal injuries. The claimants commenced this claim, alleging that the height differential between the two [628]*628slabs of cement which caused the injured claimant to fall constituted a defect in the surface of the parking lot. At trial, testimony was adduced from the claimants and a park official as to the magnitude of the height differential between the two adjacent slabs. In addition, photographs of the accident scene which were taken shortly after the occurrence were introduced into evidence. The Court of Claims subsequently determined that the height differential was one-half inch, and that the claimants failed to prove that a dangerous condition existed or that the condition constituted a defect.

Since it cannot be said that the determination of the Court of Claims could not be reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence, it should not be disturbed on appeal (see Ebenezer Mar Thoma Church v Alexander, 279 AD2d 548 [2001]). H. Miller, J.P., Ritter, Mastro and Lifson, JJ., concur.

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

In a claim to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the claimants appeal from a judgment of the Court of Claims (Lack, J.), dated September 2, 2003, which, after a nonjury trial, dismissed the claim.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The claimant Dorothy Lee allegedly tripped and fell over a raised slab of cement in a parking lot owned by the defendant, thereby sustaining personal injuries. The claimants commenced this claim, alleging that the height differential between the two [628]*628slabs of cement which caused the injured claimant to fall constituted a defect in the surface of the parking lot. At trial, testimony was adduced from the claimants and a park official as to the magnitude of the height differential between the two adjacent slabs. In addition, photographs of the accident scene which were taken shortly after the occurrence were introduced into evidence. The Court of Claims subsequently determined that the height differential was one-half inch, and that the claimants failed to prove that a dangerous condition existed or that the condition constituted a defect.

Since it cannot be said that the determination of the Court of Claims could not be reached under any fair interpretation of the evidence, it should not be disturbed on appeal (see Ebenezer Mar Thoma Church v Alexander, 279 AD2d 548 [2001]). H. Miller, J.P., Ritter, Mastro and Lifson, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 A.D.3d 627, 791 N.Y.S.2d 440, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lee-v-state-nyappdiv-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack