Ohanessian v. Chase Manhattan Realty Leasing Corp.

193 A.D.2d 567, 598 N.Y.S.2d 204
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 27, 1993
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 193 A.D.2d 567 (Ohanessian v. Chase Manhattan Realty Leasing Corp.) 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
Ohanessian v. Chase Manhattan Realty Leasing Corp., 193 A.D.2d 567, 598 N.Y.S.2d 204 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Fingerhood, J.), entered July 28, 1992, which, inter alia, denied defendants-appellants’ motion for summary judgment pursuant to CPLR 3212 dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

According to plaintiff, he slipped and fell while descending the stairway from the mezzanine level to the lobby of the Westbury Hotel, operated by defendants-appellants in Manhattan. Plaintiff attributes his fall to a Christmas garland which had been affixed by defendants and apparently slipped off the bannister and onto the stairs. As this Court held in Trujillo v Riverbay Corp. (153 AD2d 793, 794), liability as to those in control of premises can attach where "it can be shown that the owner created the condition” on the steps (see, Gordon v American Museum of Natural History, 67 NY2d 836). The only basis on which liability may be predicated is that defendants "created” the condition, rendering "irrelevant” an inquiry into "the usual questions of notice” (Cook v Rezende, 32 NY2d 596, 599). While there is no evidence as to the manner in which the garland was installed, clearly, such knowledge is in the exclusive possession of the defendants. In what manner the garland was installed, and whether the method so employed resulted in a dangerous condition created by defendants, raises issues of fact that must be resolved at trial. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Ellerin and Wallach, JJ.

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

Related

CASHION, MICHELLE v. BAJOREK, ALEXANDER T.
126 A.D.3d 1354 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2015)
Walsh v. Super Value, Inc.
76 A.D.2d 371 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2010)
Tenkate v. Tops Markets, LLC
38 A.D.3d 987 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2007)
Buompastore v. Danfords Port Jefferson, L.L.C.
35 A.D.3d 277 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2006)
Van Valkenburgh v. Philip Morris Companies, Inc.
304 A.D.2d 382 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2003)
Figueroa v. Lazarus Burman Associates
269 A.D.2d 215 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Septoff v. La Shellda Maintenance Corp.
242 A.D.2d 618 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Roundpoint v. V.N.A., Inc.
207 A.D.2d 123 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1995)
Giardina v. Lee
202 A.D.2d 278 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
193 A.D.2d 567, 598 N.Y.S.2d 204, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ohanessian-v-chase-manhattan-realty-leasing-corp-nyappdiv-1993.