Neumann v. Senior Citizens Center, Inc.

273 A.D.2d 452, 710 N.Y.S.2d 382, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7421
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 26, 2000
StatusPublished
Cited by18 cases

This text of 273 A.D.2d 452 (Neumann v. Senior Citizens Center, 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
Neumann v. Senior Citizens Center, Inc., 273 A.D.2d 452, 710 N.Y.S.2d 382, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7421 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Rockwood Park Jewish Center appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Schmidt, [453]*453J.), dated October 19, 1999, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, the complaint is dismissed insofar as asserted against the appellant, and the action against the remaining defendant is severed.

In 1998 the plaintiff tripped and fell as a result of a height differential of approximately seven-eighths of an inch between adjacent slabs in a walkway on the appellant’s property.

Whether a dangerous or defective condition exists depends on the peculiar facts and circumstances of each case and is generally a question of fact for a jury (see, Trincere v County of Suffolk, 90 NY2d 976). However, a property owner may not be held liable in damages for “ ‘ “trivial defects on a walkway, not constituting a trap or nuisance, as a consequence of which a pedestrian might merely stumble, stub his toes, or trip over a raised projection” ’ ” (Marinaccio v LeChambord Rest., 246 AD2d 514). The photographs acknowledged by the plaintiff as accurately reflecting the condition of the walkway at the time of the accident support the conclusion that, as a matter of law, the alleged defect, which did not have any of the characteristics of a trap or nuisance, was too trivial to be actionable (see, Trincere v County of Suffolk, supra; Marinaccio v LeChambord Rest., supra). Mangano, P. J., Santucci, Krausman, Florio and Schmidt, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Schenpanski v. Promise Deli, Inc.
88 A.D.3d 982 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)
Smith v. Wilerdam Property, Inc.
50 A.D.3d 1349 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Joseph v. Villages at Huntington Home Owners Ass'n
39 A.D.3d 481 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Maiello v. Eastchester Union Free School District
8 A.D.3d 536 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Morris v. Greenburgh Central School District No. 7
5 A.D.3d 567 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Reilly v. James A. Dever School
307 A.D.2d 992 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
DiNapoli v. Huntington Hospital
303 A.D.2d 359 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Hymanson v. A.L.L. Associates
300 A.D.2d 358 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Gonzalez v. Board of Education of Yonkers
298 A.D.2d 358 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Cruz v. Deno's Wonder Wheel Park
297 A.D.2d 653 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Rametta v. County of Nassau
296 A.D.2d 485 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Cicero v. Selden Associates
295 A.D.2d 391 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Arsenicos v. Westland South Shore Mall
294 A.D.2d 385 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Dynov v. 16th Avenue Realty Associates, LLC
292 A.D.2d 335 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Squires v. County of Orleans
284 A.D.2d 990 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Smith v. A.B.K. Apartments, Inc.
284 A.D.2d 323 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)
Hargrove v. Baltic Estates
278 A.D.2d 278 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Sullivan v. State
276 A.D.2d 989 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
273 A.D.2d 452, 710 N.Y.S.2d 382, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7421, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/neumann-v-senior-citizens-center-inc-nyappdiv-2000.