Medland v. Third Avenue Cosmetics, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Medland v. Third Avenue Cosmetics, Inc.

14 A.D.3d 432, 787 N.Y.S.2d 871, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 495

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

DecidedJanuary 25, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 14 A.D.3d 432 (Medland v. Third Avenue Cosmetics, Inc.) 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

Medland v. Third Avenue Cosmetics, Inc., 14 A.D.3d 432, 787 N.Y.S.2d 871, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 495 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward H. Lehner, J.), entered September 30, 2003, which granted defendants’ motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The evidence is insufficient to raise any triable issue as to whether plaintiffs injury was proximately caused by the alleged sidewalk defect retrospectively identified by plaintiff, and while there is evidence that plaintiff’s fall and ensuing injury were attributable to the circumstance that his ankles became entangled in plastic packing material, there is no evidence that defendants were responsible for the presence of those materials on the sidewalk abutting their premises. Concur—Tom, J.P., Saxe, Friedman, Nardelli and Sweeny, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward H. Lehner, J.), entered September 30, 2003, which granted defendants’ motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The evidence is insufficient to raise any triable issue as to whether plaintiffs injury was proximately caused by the alleged sidewalk defect retrospectively identified by plaintiff, and while there is evidence that plaintiff’s fall and ensuing injury were attributable to the circumstance that his ankles became entangled in plastic packing material, there is no evidence that defendants were responsible for the presence of those materials on the sidewalk abutting their premises. Concur—Tom, J.P., Saxe, Friedman, Nardelli and Sweeny, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

14 A.D.3d 432, 787 N.Y.S.2d 871, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 495, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/medland-v-third-avenue-cosmetics-inc-nyappdiv-2005.