Piscitello v. City of Tonawanda

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Piscitello v. City of Tonawanda

256 A.D.2d 1245, 684 N.Y.S.2d 89, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14455

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

DecidedDecember 31, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 256 A.D.2d 1245 (Piscitello v. City of Tonawanda) 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

Piscitello v. City of Tonawanda, 256 A.D.2d 1245, 684 N.Y.S.2d 89, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14455 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: Wendy Johnson Piscitello (plaintiff) commenced this action seeking damages for personal injuries she sustained while walking down a hill at Niawanda Park in the City of Tonawanda. Rather than walking into the park using one of the paved entrances, plaintiff descended the hill into the park on what she described as a well worn path. Plaintiff alleged that an indented or “gouged out” area at the bottom of the hill, in addition to the gravel and stones there, caused her to fall and that defendant had actual or constructive notice of that allegedly dangerous condition.

[1246]*1246Supreme Court erred in denying defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Defendant met its initial burden by submitting evidence that it had received no complaints about the area and had no reported injuries until plaintiffs accident, and plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact whether defendant had actual or constructive notice of the allegedly dangerous condition (see, Eddy v Tops Friendly Mkts., 91 AD2d 1203, affd 59 NY2d 692; Merlo v Zimmer, 231 AD2d 952, 953). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Notaro, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Wisner, Pigott, Jr., and Balio, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: Wendy Johnson Piscitello (plaintiff) commenced this action seeking damages for personal injuries she sustained while walking down a hill at Niawanda Park in the City of Tonawanda. Rather than walking into the park using one of the paved entrances, plaintiff descended the hill into the park on what she described as a well worn path. Plaintiff alleged that an indented or “gouged out” area at the bottom of the hill, in addition to the gravel and stones there, caused her to fall and that defendant had actual or constructive notice of that allegedly dangerous condition.

[1246]*1246Supreme Court erred in denying defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Defendant met its initial burden by submitting evidence that it had received no complaints about the area and had no reported injuries until plaintiffs accident, and plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact whether defendant had actual or constructive notice of the allegedly dangerous condition (see, Eddy v Tops Friendly Mkts., 91 AD2d 1203, affd 59 NY2d 692; Merlo v Zimmer, 231 AD2d 952, 953). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Notaro, J. — Summary Judgment.) Present — Pine, J. P., Hayes, Wisner, Pigott, Jr., and Balio, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

256 A.D.2d 1245, 684 N.Y.S.2d 89, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14455, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/piscitello-v-city-of-tonawanda-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack