Loiacono v. Quattro Piu, Inc.

82 A.D.3d 940, 919 N.Y.2d 87

Opinion

The plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages for [941]*941personal injuries she allegedly sustained after tripping over a step at the defendants’ restaurant. The defendants established their prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that the alleged condition which caused the plaintiff to fall was open and obvious and not inherently dangerous (see Weiss v Half Hollow Hills Cent. School Dist., 70 AD3d 932, 933 [2010]; Ramos v Cooper Invs., Inc., 49 AD3d 623, 624 [2008]; Pirie v Krasinski, 18 AD3d 848, 849 [2005]). In opposition, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly awarded the defendants summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Mastro, J.E, Chambers, Lott and Cohen, JJ., concur.

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

Loiacono v. Quattro Piu, Inc., 82 A.D.3d 940, 919 N.Y.2d 87 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

82 A.D.3d 940 (Loiacono v. Quattro Piu, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Alvarez v. Prospect Hospital
501 N.E.2d 572 (New York Court of Appeals, 1986)
Pirie v. Krasinski
18 A.D.3d 848 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Ramos v. Cooper Investors, Inc.
49 A.D.3d 623 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Weiss v. Half Hollow Hills Central School District
70 A.D.3d 932 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)