Quintana v. Mei

254 A.D.2d 96, 679 N.Y.S.2d 282, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10684
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 13, 1998·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Allen Saks, J.), entered January 17, 1997, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by defendants-appellants’ brief, denied defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as that motion sought dismissal of plaintiffs claim for negligent snow and ice removal, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Since the record discloses the existence of factual issues respecting whether defendants, in the course of removing snow and ice accumulations on the public sidewalk abutting their residence, either created or heightened the hazard that is alleged to have caused plaintiffs fall and injury, defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint was properly denied (see, Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324). Concur — Milonas, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Quintana v. Mei, 254 A.D.2d 96, 679 N.Y.S.2d 282, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10684 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

254 A.D.2d 96 (Quintana v. Mei) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Rebell v. Emigrant Savings Bank
257 A.D.2d 491 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1999)