Richards v. Shop Rite at Richmond Avenue

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Richards v. Shop Rite at Richmond Avenue

259 A.D.2d 685, 686 N.Y.S.2d 848, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2699

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

DecidedMarch 22, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 259 A.D.2d 685 (Richards v. Shop Rite at Richmond Avenue) 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

Richards v. Shop Rite at Richmond Avenue, 259 A.D.2d 685, 686 N.Y.S.2d 848, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2699 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Sangiorgio, J.), dated October 10, 1997, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs commenced this action after the plaintiff Florence Richards slipped and fell in the defendant’s store. However, in opposition to the defendant’s prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact that the defendant either created or had actual or constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition alleged for a period of time sufficient to remedy the condition (see, Piacquadio v Recine Realty Corp., 84 NY2d 967; Gordon v American Museum of Natural History, 67 NY2d 836). Accordingly, the defendant was properly granted summary judgment dismissing the complaint. O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Thompson and Goldstein, 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 plaintiffs appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Sangiorgio, J.), dated October 10, 1997, which granted the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The plaintiffs commenced this action after the plaintiff Florence Richards slipped and fell in the defendant’s store. However, in opposition to the defendant’s prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact that the defendant either created or had actual or constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition alleged for a period of time sufficient to remedy the condition (see, Piacquadio v Recine Realty Corp., 84 NY2d 967; Gordon v American Museum of Natural History, 67 NY2d 836). Accordingly, the defendant was properly granted summary judgment dismissing the complaint. O’Brien, J. P., Ritter, Thompson and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

259 A.D.2d 685, 686 N.Y.S.2d 848, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 2699, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/richards-v-shop-rite-at-richmond-avenue-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack