Minore v. Chase Manhattan Bank

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Minore v. Chase Manhattan Bank

205 A.D.2d 596, 614 N.Y.S.2d 292, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6190

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

DecidedJune 13, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 205 A.D.2d 596 (Minore v. Chase Manhattan Bank) 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

Minore v. Chase Manhattan Bank, 205 A.D.2d 596, 614 N.Y.S.2d 292, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6190 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Leone, J.), dated October 8, 1992, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Under the circumstances of this case, we agree with the Supreme Court’s conclusion that issues of fact exist warranting a jury’s determination as to whether the defendant bank permitted an accumulation of ice and snow to remain on the steps of its branch office for an unreasonably long time prior to the plaintiff Ronald Minore’s fall (see, Bordonaro v Bank of Blasdell, 285 NY 606; Mason v Eagles Lodge, 30 AD2d 605; Zaccardo v City of New York, 283 App Div 822). Bracken, J. P., Miller, Copertino and Hart, JJ., concur.

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

In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Leone, J.), dated October 8, 1992, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Under the circumstances of this case, we agree with the Supreme Court’s conclusion that issues of fact exist warranting a jury’s determination as to whether the defendant bank permitted an accumulation of ice and snow to remain on the steps of its branch office for an unreasonably long time prior to the plaintiff Ronald Minore’s fall (see, Bordonaro v Bank of Blasdell, 285 NY 606; Mason v Eagles Lodge, 30 AD2d 605; Zaccardo v City of New York, 283 App Div 822). Bracken, J. P., Miller, Copertino and Hart, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

205 A.D.2d 596, 614 N.Y.S.2d 292, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6190, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/minore-v-chase-manhattan-bank-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack