Martin v. City of Cohoes

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Martin v. City of Cohoes

50 A.D.2d 1035, 377 N.Y.S.2d 757, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12039

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

DecidedDecember 30, 1975

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 50 A.D.2d 1035 (Martin v. City of Cohoes) 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

Martin v. City of Cohoes, 50 A.D.2d 1035, 377 N.Y.S.2d 757, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12039 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinions

— Ap[1036]*1036peal from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of plaintiff, entered January 5, 1973 in Albany County, upon a verdict rendered at a Trial Term. We reversed the judgment, on the law, and dismissed the complaint (44 AD2d 864). The Court of Appeals has reversed the order entered on our decision and remitted the case to us for a review of the facts (37 NY2d 162). The sole factual issue raised by appellant upon this appeal was the contention that the proof failed to establish a basis for liability. The plaintiff testified that her shoe became wedged in a crevice between the sidewalk and a curb. There was also expert testimony that the slope of the curb downward toward the road was of an unusual degree. Such a condition is prima facie evidence of negligence and sufficient to sustain a jury finding of a dangerous defect or condition. (See Foster v City of New York, 6 NY2d 852, 853; Styler v City of New York, 303 NY 843.) Judgment affirmed, with costs. Herlihy, P. J., Greenblott, Sweeney and Kane, JJ., concur; Reynolds, J., dissents and votes to reverse in the following memorandum.'

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

— Ap[1036]*1036peal from a judgment of the Supreme Court in favor of plaintiff, entered January 5, 1973 in Albany County, upon a verdict rendered at a Trial Term. We reversed the judgment, on the law, and dismissed the complaint (44 AD2d 864). The Court of Appeals has reversed the order entered on our decision and remitted the case to us for a review of the facts (37 NY2d 162). The sole factual issue raised by appellant upon this appeal was the contention that the proof failed to establish a basis for liability. The plaintiff testified that her shoe became wedged in a crevice between the sidewalk and a curb. There was also expert testimony that the slope of the curb downward toward the road was of an unusual degree. Such a condition is prima facie evidence of negligence and sufficient to sustain a jury finding of a dangerous defect or condition. (See Foster v City of New York, 6 NY2d 852, 853; Styler v City of New York, 303 NY 843.) Judgment affirmed, with costs. Herlihy, P. J., Greenblott, Sweeney and Kane, JJ., concur; Reynolds, J., dissents and votes to reverse in the following memorandum.'

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 A.D.2d 1035, 377 N.Y.S.2d 757, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12039, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-v-city-of-cohoes-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack