Salazar v. KFC National Management Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Salazar v. KFC National Management Co.

260 A.D.2d 171, 688 N.Y.S.2d 35, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3611

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

DecidedApril 6, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 260 A.D.2d 171 (Salazar v. KFC National Management Co.) 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

Salazar v. KFC National Management Co., 260 A.D.2d 171, 688 N.Y.S.2d 35, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3611 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lucindo Suarez, J.), entered February 23, 1998, which, in an action to recover for personal injuries sustained ás a result of a slip and fall on snow or ice, denied defendants-appellants abutting property owners’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The climatological report submitted by plaintiff indicating that several inches of snow and ice pellets had fallen during the two days preceding her accident, plaintiff’s testimony that it appeared that some shoveling had been done but that a safe path had not been cleared, and defendants’ admission that they routinely shoveled and salted the sidewalk in front of their property after a snowfall but inability to state definitively whether they had done so during the preceding two days raise issues of fact as to whether defendants created or increased the hazard that caused plaintiff’s injuries (see, Glick v City of New York, 139 AD2d 402; Jiuz v City of New York, 244 AD2d 298). Whether the icy condition that caused plaintiff to slip was the result of a snowstorm the night preceding her early morning accident is also an issue of fact. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Tom, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lucindo Suarez, J.), entered February 23, 1998, which, in an action to recover for personal injuries sustained ás a result of a slip and fall on snow or ice, denied defendants-appellants abutting property owners’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against them, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The climatological report submitted by plaintiff indicating that several inches of snow and ice pellets had fallen during the two days preceding her accident, plaintiff’s testimony that it appeared that some shoveling had been done but that a safe path had not been cleared, and defendants’ admission that they routinely shoveled and salted the sidewalk in front of their property after a snowfall but inability to state definitively whether they had done so during the preceding two days raise issues of fact as to whether defendants created or increased the hazard that caused plaintiff’s injuries (see, Glick v City of New York, 139 AD2d 402; Jiuz v City of New York, 244 AD2d 298). Whether the icy condition that caused plaintiff to slip was the result of a snowstorm the night preceding her early morning accident is also an issue of fact. Concur — Nardelli, J. P., Tom, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

260 A.D.2d 171, 688 N.Y.S.2d 35, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3611, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/salazar-v-kfc-national-management-co-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack