Overton v. Leisure Time Recreation, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Overton v. Leisure Time Recreation, Inc.

280 A.D.2d 655, 721 N.Y.S.2d 95, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1837

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

DecidedFebruary 26, 2001

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 280 A.D.2d 655 (Overton v. Leisure Time Recreation, 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

Overton v. Leisure Time Recreation, Inc., 280 A.D.2d 655, 721 N.Y.S.2d 95, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1837 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garson, J.), entered May 3, 2000, as denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff Daryll Overton was injured at the defendant’s bowling alley. At a pretrial deposition, he testified that his foot slipped out from underneath him as he took his first practice throw. At the approximate time of the accident, the bowling alley mechanic was in the process of oiling the bowling lanes. There is also evidence that could support the conclusion that there were footprint-shaped oil spots in the vicinity of the accident.

In response to the defendant’s prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the plaintiffs raised material issues of fact. These include whether the oil spots were present at the time of the accident, whether one of the defendant’s employees created that condition, and whether it was in fact that condition which caused the injured plaintiff to slip and fall. The Supreme Court properly denied the motion for summary judgment (cf, Lathan v NCAS Realty Mgt. Corp., 240 AD2d 474). Bracken, Acting P. J., Altman, Goldstein and McGinity, 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 defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Garson, J.), entered May 3, 2000, as denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiff Daryll Overton was injured at the defendant’s bowling alley. At a pretrial deposition, he testified that his foot slipped out from underneath him as he took his first practice throw. At the approximate time of the accident, the bowling alley mechanic was in the process of oiling the bowling lanes. There is also evidence that could support the conclusion that there were footprint-shaped oil spots in the vicinity of the accident.

In response to the defendant’s prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the plaintiffs raised material issues of fact. These include whether the oil spots were present at the time of the accident, whether one of the defendant’s employees created that condition, and whether it was in fact that condition which caused the injured plaintiff to slip and fall. The Supreme Court properly denied the motion for summary judgment (cf, Lathan v NCAS Realty Mgt. Corp., 240 AD2d 474). Bracken, Acting P. J., Altman, Goldstein and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

280 A.D.2d 655, 721 N.Y.S.2d 95, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1837, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/overton-v-leisure-time-recreation-inc-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack