O'Connor v. Katonah Museum of Art

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

O'Connor v. Katonah Museum of Art

251 A.D.2d 561, 676 N.Y.S.2d 183, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7499

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

DecidedJune 22, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 251 A.D.2d 561 (O'Connor v. Katonah Museum of Art) 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

O'Connor v. Katonah Museum of Art, 251 A.D.2d 561, 676 N.Y.S.2d 183, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7499 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Coppola, J.), entered May 9, 1997, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment, as the record demonstrates that the condition over which the injured plaintiff tripped and fell was not an inherently dangerous condition, and was one which was readily observable by those employing the reasonable use of their senses (see, Binensztok v Marshall Stores, 228 AD2d 534, 535; Pepic v Joco Realty, 216 AD2d 95). O’Brien, J. P., Thompson, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Coppola, J.), entered May 9, 1997, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment, as the record demonstrates that the condition over which the injured plaintiff tripped and fell was not an inherently dangerous condition, and was one which was readily observable by those employing the reasonable use of their senses (see, Binensztok v Marshall Stores, 228 AD2d 534, 535; Pepic v Joco Realty, 216 AD2d 95). O’Brien, J. P., Thompson, Friedmann and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

251 A.D.2d 561, 676 N.Y.S.2d 183, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7499, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oconnor-v-katonah-museum-of-art-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack