Sloan v. Village of Hempstead

223 A.D.2d 632, 636 N.Y.S.2d 852, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 443
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided January 22, 1996·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendant Village of Hempstead appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Murphy, J.), dated December 21, 1994, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is reversed, with costs, the motion is granted, the complaint is dismissed insofar as it is asserted against the appellant, and the cross claims asserted against the appellant are dismissed.

On October 28, 1991, the plaintiff tripped and fell on an allegedly dangerous public sidewalk in the Village of Hemp-stead. The plaintiff subsequently commenced this action against the Village and the abutting landowner. The Village [633] thereafter moved for summary judgment, contending that it had not received prior written notice of the allegedly defective condition as required by Village Law § 6-628. The plaintiff did not dispute that the Village had received no written notice of the alleged defect, but instead contended, in an affirmation by her attorney, that written notice was not required because the Village had created the defective condition by removing a nearby tree.

.Summary judgment should have been awarded to the Village. Pursuant to Village Law § 6-628, prior written notice is a condition precedent to maintaining an action against the Village arising from a sidewalk defect (see, Tyschak v Incorporated Vil. of Westbury, 193 AD2d 670; Mollahan v Village of Port Washington, N., 153 AD2d 881). While no prior written notice of defect is necessary where there is an affirmative act of negligence (see, Marona v Incorporated Vil. of Mamaroneck, 203 AD2d 337; Tyschak v Incorporated Vil. of Westbury, supra), the plaintiff’s unsubstantiated allegation that the Village created the defective condition, made in the affirmation of her attorney, who had no personal knowledge of the facts, was insufficient to defeat the Village’s motion (see, Tyschak v Incorporated Vil. of Westbury, supra; Dabbs v City of Peekskill, 178 AD2d 577; West v Village of Mamaroneck, 172 AD2d 827). Thompson, J. P., Sullivan, Krausman and Florio, JJ., concur.

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

Sloan v. Village of Hempstead, 223 A.D.2d 632, 636 N.Y.S.2d 852, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 443 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

223 A.D.2d 632 (Sloan v. Village of Hempstead) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Ravina v. Incorporated Town of Greenburgh
6 A.D.3d 688 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2004)
Monopoli v. County of Nassau
292 A.D.2d 356 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2002)
Ovisinak v. Town of Southold
277 A.D.2d 295 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Frullo v. Incorporated Village of Rockville Centre
274 A.D.2d 499 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2000)
Cattani v. Inc. Village of Ocean Beach
252 A.D.2d 533 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Brooks v. Village of Babylon
251 A.D.2d 526 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
Fiedler v. Incorporated Village of Massapequa Park
242 A.D.2d 556 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Godesky v. First Unum Life Insurance
239 A.D.2d 547 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Hirsch v. Morgan Stanley & Co.
239 A.D.2d 466 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)