Rosado v. New York City Housing Authority

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rosado v. New York City Housing Authority

236 A.D.2d 204, 653 N.Y.S.2d 552, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 810

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided February 4, 1997·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter Tolub, J.), entered on or about December 8, 1995, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We agree with the IAS Court that plaintiff’s claim that the puddle of vomit on which she allegedly slipped and fell was visible and apparent and existed on the stairway for a sufficient length of time before the accident for defendant’s employees to have discovered and remedied it was speculative, and insufficient to raise an issue of fact as to defendant’s constructive [205] notice of it. Nor is there merit to plaintiff’s contention that constructive notice may be inferred from the alleged continuous existence of debris on the stairway. "[A] 'general awareness’ that a dangerous condition may be present is legally insufficient to constitute notice of the particular condition that caused plaintiff’s fall” (Piacquadio v Recine Realty Corp., 84 NY2d 967, 969). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Wallach, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter Tolub, J.), entered on or about December 8, 1995, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

We agree with the IAS Court that plaintiff’s claim that the puddle of vomit on which she allegedly slipped and fell was visible and apparent and existed on the stairway for a sufficient length of time before the accident for defendant’s employees to have discovered and remedied it was speculative, and insufficient to raise an issue of fact as to defendant’s constructive [205] notice of it. Nor is there merit to plaintiff’s contention that constructive notice may be inferred from the alleged continuous existence of debris on the stairway. "[A] 'general awareness’ that a dangerous condition may be present is legally insufficient to constitute notice of the particular condition that caused plaintiff’s fall” (Piacquadio v Recine Realty Corp., 84 NY2d 967, 969). Concur—Murphy, P. J., Wallach, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

Rosado v. New York City Housing Authority, 236 A.D.2d 204, 653 N.Y.S.2d 552, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 810 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

236 A.D.2d 204 (Rosado v. New York City Housing Authority) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related