Salaam v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Salaam v. City of New York

226 A.D.2d 173, 640 N.Y.S.2d 117, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3639

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 9, 1996·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Hansel McGee, J., and a jury), entered on or about March 2,1995, apportioning liability 100% against defendants, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Legally sufficient evidence of defendants’ constructive notice of a dangerous condition was provided by the uncontroverted testimony at trial that the puddle in which plaintiffs slipped was 21h feet by 21/2 feet and was dirty with numerous footprints, both wet and dry, leading out of it in all directions (see, Negri v Stop & Shop, 65 NY2d 625; Catanzaro v King Kullen Grocery Co., 194 AD2d 584). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Hansel McGee, J., and a jury), entered on or about March 2,1995, apportioning liability 100% against defendants, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Legally sufficient evidence of defendants’ constructive notice of a dangerous condition was provided by the uncontroverted testimony at trial that the puddle in which plaintiffs slipped was 21h feet by 21/2 feet and was dirty with numerous footprints, both wet and dry, leading out of it in all directions (see, Negri v Stop & Shop, 65 NY2d 625; Catanzaro v King Kullen Grocery Co., 194 AD2d 584). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Salaam v. City of New York, 226 A.D.2d 173, 640 N.Y.S.2d 117, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3639 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

226 A.D.2d 173 (Salaam v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related