Marcelle v. New York City Transit Authority

289 A.D.2d 459, 735 N.Y.S.2d 580, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12993
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 24, 2001
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 289 A.D.2d 459 (Marcelle 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
Marcelle v. New York City Transit Authority, 289 A.D.2d 459, 735 N.Y.S.2d 580, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12993 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Bruno, J.), dated October 18, 2000, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant established its prima facie entitlement to summary judgment dismissing the complaint as the plaintiffs’ deposition testimony failed to show that there was an unsafe condition on the stairs which was created by the defendant or of which it had actual or constructive notice (see, Marku v 33 S & P Realty Corp., 251 AD2d 633). In opposition, the plaintiffs submitted self-serving affidavits in an effort to show that the stairs where the injured plaintiff fell were covered with a soapy, slimy substance. These affidavits contradicted the plaintiffs’ earlier deposition testimony. Thus, they presented a feigned factual issue designed to avoid the consequences of their earlier statements that the steps were merely damp and wet, and were insufficient to show the existence of a triable issue of fact (see, Nieves v ISS Cleaning Servs. Group, 284 AD2d 441; Phillips v Bronx Lebanon Hosp., 268 AD2d 318; Buziashvili v Ryan, 264 AD2d 797; Prunty v Keltie’s Bum Steer, 163 AD2d 595).

The plaintiffs’ remaining contention is without merit. O’Brien, J. P.; Santucci, Florio and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Lipsker v. 650 Crown Equities, LLC
81 A.D.3d 789 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Hughes-Berg v. Mueller
50 A.D.3d 856 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Graziano v. 110 Sand Co.
50 A.D.3d 635 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Karwowski v. New York City Transit Authority
44 A.D.3d 826 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Ruck v. Levittown Norse Associates, LLC
27 A.D.3d 444 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Joseph v. New York Racing Ass'n
28 A.D.3d 105 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Stancil v. Supermarkets General
16 A.D.3d 402 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2005)
Franklin v. Omni Sagamore Hotel
5 A.D.3d 348 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Berkowitz v. Dayton Construction, Inc.
2 A.D.3d 764 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Mestric v. Martinez Cleaning Co.
306 A.D.2d 449 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Wilson v. Prazza
306 A.D.2d 466 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Klor v. American Airlines
305 A.D.2d 550 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Nembhard v. Mount Vernon City School District Board of Education
300 A.D.2d 456 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Rajgopaul v. Toys "R" Us, Inc.
297 A.D.2d 728 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
289 A.D.2d 459, 735 N.Y.S.2d 580, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12993, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marcelle-v-new-york-city-transit-authority-nyappdiv-2001.