Qi Cheng v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Qi Cheng v. New York City Housing Authority

262 A.D.2d 14, 690 N.Y.S.2d 560, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6177

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 1, 1999·Published

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Phyllis GangelJacob, J.), entered November 25, 1997, which, insofar as appealed from, denied the Housing Authority’s motion for summary judgment, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion granted and the verified complaint dismissed. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of defendant-appellant dismissing the complaint as against it.

Despite plaintiff’s Qi Cheng’s deposition testimony that it had been raining prior to 8:57 a.m. on the morning when she slipped and fell on a puddle of water as she left the elevator in her apartment building, there is nothing in the record which indicates how long the puddle was there. As such, plaintiffs have failed to establish that the puddle which caused the ac[15]*15cident existed for an appreciable length of time so as to permit the Housing Authority’s employees to rectify the dangerous condition (see, Puryear v New York City Hous. Auth., 255 AD2d 138). Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Williams, Wallach and Andrias, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Phyllis GangelJacob, J.), entered November 25, 1997, which, insofar as appealed from, denied the Housing Authority’s motion for summary judgment, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the motion granted and the verified complaint dismissed. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in favor of defendant-appellant dismissing the complaint as against it.

Despite plaintiff’s Qi Cheng’s deposition testimony that it had been raining prior to 8:57 a.m. on the morning when she slipped and fell on a puddle of water as she left the elevator in her apartment building, there is nothing in the record which indicates how long the puddle was there. As such, plaintiffs have failed to establish that the puddle which caused the ac[15]*15cident existed for an appreciable length of time so as to permit the Housing Authority’s employees to rectify the dangerous condition (see, Puryear v New York City Hous. Auth., 255 AD2d 138). Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Williams, Wallach and Andrias, JJ.

Qi Cheng v. New York City Housing Authority, 262 A.D.2d 14, 690 N.Y.S.2d 560, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6177 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

262 A.D.2d 14 (Qi Cheng v. New York City Housing Authority) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related