McCauliffe v. City of Syracuse

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

McCauliffe v. City of Syracuse

221 A.D.2d 946, 635 N.Y.S.2d 558, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13433

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

DecidedNovember 15, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 221 A.D.2d 946 (McCauliffe v. City of Syracuse) 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

McCauliffe v. City of Syracuse, 221 A.D.2d 946, 635 N.Y.S.2d 558, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13433 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in denying defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Plaintiff failed to raise a factual issue whether the defect noted on a record of complaints maintained by defendant’s Department of Public Works is the same defect that allegedly caused her accident and injuries (see, Ortsman v Town of Oyster Bay, 178 AD2d 588). Plaintiff submitted no evidence to show that the 1989 complaint of a "low spot” in the road in front of 357 Elm Street, which condition the City asserted was repaired the same day, referred to the crumbling and broken condition of the curb or curb cut that allegedly caused her to fall five years later. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Major, J.—Prior Notice.) Present—Denman, P. J., Lawton, Wesley, Doerr and Balio, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: Supreme Court erred in denying defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Plaintiff failed to raise a factual issue whether the defect noted on a record of complaints maintained by defendant’s Department of Public Works is the same defect that allegedly caused her accident and injuries (see, Ortsman v Town of Oyster Bay, 178 AD2d 588). Plaintiff submitted no evidence to show that the 1989 complaint of a "low spot” in the road in front of 357 Elm Street, which condition the City asserted was repaired the same day, referred to the crumbling and broken condition of the curb or curb cut that allegedly caused her to fall five years later. (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Major, J.—Prior Notice.) Present—Denman, P. J., Lawton, Wesley, Doerr and Balio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

221 A.D.2d 946, 635 N.Y.S.2d 558, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13433, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccauliffe-v-city-of-syracuse-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack