Linett v. Budget Rent-A-Car

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Linett v. Budget Rent-A-Car

296 A.D.2d 302, 744 N.Y.S.2d 180, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7126

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

DecidedJuly 2, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 296 A.D.2d 302 (Linett v. Budget Rent-A-Car) 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

Linett v. Budget Rent-A-Car, 296 A.D.2d 302, 744 N.Y.S.2d 180, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7126 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marilyn Shafer, J.), entered May 24, 2001, which, in an action for personal injuries sustained when plaintiff tripped over the base of a chair on defendant’s premises, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion denied and the complaint reinstated.

Plaintiff claims that the chair in question, which was in a waiting area facing the counter where defendant serviced its customers, had a metal or steel base support that protruded about four to six inches beyond the front edge of the chair’s two seats and was not flush with the floor, and in which her shoe got caught as she got up out of the chair. The evidence, including the testimony of defendant’s manager that defendant placed the chair in its office, raises an issue of fact as to whether defendant created a dangerous or defective condition on its premises (compare, Guerrieri v Summa, 193 AD2d 647). Concur — Williams, P.J., Andrias, Lerner, Rubin and Friedman, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marilyn Shafer, J.), entered May 24, 2001, which, in an action for personal injuries sustained when plaintiff tripped over the base of a chair on defendant’s premises, granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion denied and the complaint reinstated.

Plaintiff claims that the chair in question, which was in a waiting area facing the counter where defendant serviced its customers, had a metal or steel base support that protruded about four to six inches beyond the front edge of the chair’s two seats and was not flush with the floor, and in which her shoe got caught as she got up out of the chair. The evidence, including the testimony of defendant’s manager that defendant placed the chair in its office, raises an issue of fact as to whether defendant created a dangerous or defective condition on its premises (compare, Guerrieri v Summa, 193 AD2d 647). Concur — Williams, P.J., Andrias, Lerner, Rubin and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

296 A.D.2d 302, 744 N.Y.S.2d 180, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7126, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/linett-v-budget-rent-a-car-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack